Hope for peace

I was sitting in my internship today and heard a story that gave me more hope for a (eventual) peaceful solution to the Palestinian-Israeli question.  I'm going to rehash it here:


On June 8 an eight-year-old boy, Oron Yarden, was kidnapped at Savyon, near
Tel Aviv. The kidnapper managed to elude the police and escape with the IL2
million ransom paid by the child's parents. Impassioned appeals by the prime
minister, the chief rabbis, and others to the kidnapper to release the boy were of no
avail; the decomposed body of the child was discovered buried in sand dunes near
Netanya on June 30. He had been strangled to death shortly after the ransom was
paid. A 33-year-old Netanya man was arrested shortly after the body was found,
and was sentenced to life imprisonment plus 34 years.

This is from an article that one of the ladies in my office pointed me to.  The boy, Oron, was her son.  Since that time, her husband has passed away and her surviving children have moved to Switzerland with her grandchildren.  She told me that her life ended that day; she has tried to kill herself twice.  However, when the police asked her if she thought it would be ok for the man to be up for limited parole, one day a month to see his wife, she agreed.  Her response was that Israel doesn't have a death penalty and, if they did, she certainly wishes that he would have gotten it.  However, the man has been in prison for over 30 years and since there is no death penalty, he should be allowed to continue living like a human being, not caged up like an animal for the rest of his life.  I was surprised by that.  I would have thought that she would want the worst possible punishment for someone like that, but, while she hasn't forgiven him, as the pain dulls with time, she has learned to live with and accept the fact that the world is a shitty place sometimes and there is only so much we can do about it.  You just have to get busy living or get busy dying.  Her life is good now.  She is dating a wealthy man who takes her traveling and on cruises and treats her very well, much better than her late husband and she is very happy.  She still works in the ICT, though, because even though she is over 70, she likes the work, it keeps her busy, and in a way it could help prevent another instance like what happened to her.

Development vs Independence

One of the ways that the original Jewish immigrants justified their entrance into Palestine (other than the historical/biblical) was the idea that they were bringing development to the area.  While I don't think that anyone can dispute that the predominantly Jewish areas were more developed overall, this still smacks of a colonialist argument.  The British and French used the same justification for their involvement in Africa, India, etc.  However, I have to agree with the Palestinians when they say that they didn't ask for it just like the Africans didn't ask for any help.  We can draw parallels to this with the invasion of Iraq.  Bringing "democracy" to a region without their asking it is a very similar concept.  It isn't PC to imply that the people living there were not advanced enough to develop themselves.  It wasn't true then and it isn't true now, but I think that is still the underlying idea behind a lot of people's thinking.  The Iraqis were not strong enough to take control of the country themselves, so we would come in and be these amazing liberators and welcomed with open arms.  Assuming we leave an American friendly government in place, we still may have a problem with the local population resenting us and viewing any troops or bases remaining in the country as well as the government as a vestige of imperialism.  I think that Americans and Iraqis may have a better chance at reconciliation in the near future than Israelis and Palestinians, but the underlying concept is the same: the Western, developed world thinking that they need to make the rest of the world like ourselves and forcing our ideas on them.  I think there are plenty of places where this fusion has happened organically and Western culture has been invited in to blend with local customs and ideas naturally.

Justice

I was reading in the Caplan book and there was a quote that really stuck out to me.  "The more historical justice that each side demands, the less their real national interests get served.  Justice and interests fall into conflict."

This brings puts into better words a concept that I have had for a while.  When I look at the conflict, I see the current situation.  I don't think it matters who has won or lost over the years.  Historical justice is something that can go back years, centuries, or millenia.  Both sides will claim injustice and both sides will demand retribution and/or compensation.  As for their claims, there was a comment on how God promised a vaguely defined holy land to "the children of Abraham" as an everlasting possession.  Considering that Jews claim decendence from Isaac and Muslims claim decendence from Ishmael, the two sons of Abraham, both are technically the "seed of Abraham" and yet nobody addresses this.  I'm sure that Jews would dispute this claim just as Muslims would argue it.  Regardless, they are still saying that an invisible, omnipotent being promised something to you and this doesn't seem to be the best way to divide real estate.  It would be like claiming the North Pole because Santa Clause lives there.  England might dispute that, but they call him Father Christmas and they dress him differently, so they must be wrong and ours is true.

Dwelling on the past will only complicate an already complicated issue further.  People need to look at the current issues and find a way to reach resolutions that are acceptable to both sides.  Overall, I think most people realize that historical issues are not the basis for the argument, but it often comes back to that.  It may be that most of the people in power don't focus as much on the past anymore, but there is always something else to justify the status quo.  While I don't think that historical justice is the most commonly used logic among the governments and other parties in the negotiations, I think that among regular people it is still used to justify the occupation and policies Israel has against the Palestinians.  It is still used as a theme to control public sentiment much like fear of terrorism is used in the US.  The terrorist theme is obviously used in Israel as well, but they are able to use the other narrative to compliment it.

Intern issues

So, I guess it's time for me to jump on the complaint wagon.  Actually, the internship is fine, but it's the people that I'm working with that I have an issue with.  I have been working on my paper on extremism for about two weeks now and my partner and I decided to exchange our work to see what the other is doing.  She has done much more than me in terms of length and graphics, but her content is questionable.  First of all, she is not much of a writer.  She doesn't know how to write a formal article or paper.  Honestly, it sounds very high-school / undergrad level.  It just doesn't sound professional enough to publish for me.  Granted, it is a rough draft and I can probably help her out a bit, but I don't want to have to rewrite the entire thing.  The other issue is what she is writing about.  She opens the paper with a brief history of Islam in the US.  According to her "research" there is evidence of mosques in Colorado, Utah, and New Mexico that date to 700-800 AD.  I found the website and it's obviously a very pro Islam group.  The idea that the first thing Mohammad did after establishing the first Caliphate was to send people to the New World who settled there and taught the natives to worship Islam is ludicrous.  Even if they are from 800 AD or 1000AD it isn't tenable.  I certainly don't want to share credit for this paper if it is full of conspiracy theory type content.  However, I am also fully aware that Stevie won't let that happen.  If he read it at this point, he would have a field day with it.  He is ruthless when giving us shit, and will probably make fun of her.  In order to avoid this and any potential backlash I can face from it, I asked her to take it out because it isn't a proven source.  Most of the rest of it is ok, but needs more information in it and less graphics.  She works really hard, I have to give her that, but she really needs some direction and isn't too interested in my commentary when I try to give it to her.  If it continues, I may ask Stevie to give her something else to do and I'll finish it myself.  The other option would be to let her do a lot of research, write it up, and then I will fix it after we finish.  That will take some time and a lot of rewriting, but if I do it by myself, I don't think that I will get it done in time.  It has taken me 2 weeks to do the first section and I don't think I can do the other 4 or 5 in time without her.  Even then, I may have to do some work on it when I get home, mostly because I just don't trust anyone else to do it for me.

Where am I? (my long blog)

As far as my internship goes, I'm in the absolute best one in the group as far as I am concerned.  The ICT is a fantastic place to work.  (I know you know everything about it, but the syllabus says to describe it, so I will.)  There are about three full time interns, one full time employee, and a supervisor.  Everyone is working on different topics, but all are obviously related to counter terrorism.  Stevie runs a good ship.  He isn't too strict and lets us interpret our assignments the way that we choose so long as we stay on task and produce good work.  Our job is to produce research for the school that will be used by the faculty in their own work.  Currently Boaz Ganor, the head of the program, is producing articles for publication but the general goal of our organization is to disseminate information for other people to use in their research and personal edification.  I'm not aware of any organizations or governments that contract with the ICT to produce reports for them, but I suppose it is a possibility.  As far as what I want to get from this internship, I am looking for several things.  Originally, I just wanted to get experience working in CT that I would be able to put on my resume.  However, it looks like I’m going to get much more out of it than that.  Aside from the experience, I am currently working on a paper that will be published on the website.  This will be my first publication and although it may not be the most prestigious of journals or mediums, I am excited to have something that I can point to and be proud of.  If I ever decide to go for a PhD I will have at least two published articles (I will be working on another large project for my Master’s capstone).  In addition to this, I have made several contacts that could be useful in the future.  I now know Boaz and will try to stay in contact with him.  He is fairly well known in the CT field and works closely with American counterparts.  Stevie will also likely be doing a PhD in the States at some point and could be a great contact for any future jobs or projects I will work on.  Just having people I can ask about research and who to read and what to study is something handy.  Even the people I work with and the other people in our group could potentially be a resource as we all begin to enter the job market.  Rush has a similar career path in mind as do a few of the other interns.  I hate the word “networking” but whether I like it or not, that is what I am doing.  This is my first foray into counter-terrorism.  While I have studied the Middle East, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and South Asia in the past, I have never exclusively focused on the issue of combating terror.  It has been an interesting experience that I will definitely be able to use in the future.  In fact, I am taking a class on CT next semester and hope to be able to use some of the work I have done here to my advantage during the course.  Ideally, I would like to do something with CT in the future, either with the intelligence community or with some other government organization.  This internship and the seminar course will look very good on a resume and will give me more credibility than I currently have.  The organization, overall, is very conservative, but in a good way.  We constantly joke about peaceniks how much the Western World kicks ass when it comes to fighting the bad guys, but we don’t let racism or politics enter into the equation.  People are constantly wondering on my opinion of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and how it relates to CT.  My response would be that decisions made on the government level will affect how many terrorists there are out there and our job is to find ways to mitigate the amount of violence they can cause.  I like the CIA model.  They don’t make policy; they get the information that allows policy makers to do their job.  Likewise, there are terrorists out there and our job is to figure out who they are and how we can stop them.  The politics can be left to wiser men than I (though the wisdom of politicians is a subject of much debate).  It is nice that everyone in the group has a good sense of humor and because everyone is very secular, no subject is taboo.  We run the gamut of jokes from terrorists, Americans, Jews/Israelis, Russians, politicians and more.  In a way, I like to think of it as how a doctor must get through the day.  I actually know quite a few doctors and they generally have a great sense of humor, though you wouldn’t guess it most of the time.  I think in order to deal with sickness and death on a daily basis; you have to be able to laugh.  We deal with some pretty horrible stuff and, while most of the joking we do would not leave the room, it is a way to deal with reading about suicide bombings, dead civilians, and other types of hate.  So we have a competition to find the hottest terrorist and put her picture on the wall or we discuss which jihadi website we should put an intern’s picture on to have the most effect on their future career.  I like this concept because I’m a cynic when it comes to government.  I don’t want any part in the electoral process other than my informed vote.  My plan is to work with whatever jackass gets elected and do everything I can to make sure that the right decisions are made and the least amount of damage is done.  Right now I’m just concentrating on research, but when I enter the workforce, I would rather be doing field work.  As a diplomat, as an analyst, or on the ground doing development, I prefer to have a task and do it working with the resources at my disposal rather than politicking and pandering to keep my job.  

Rosa Parks and the whiskey bar

There is a bar on Dizengoff that is called Rosa Parks.  Having been there several times, we have wondered where the name came from.  Our first visit, we asked the several of the waitresses where the name came from and recieved different answers from all of them.  The first had no idea.  The second knew that she was a black lady in the US and that's about it.  The third one explained to us that the bar had changed owners several times and the reason for the name has since been lost.  What is interesting, however, is that on our last visit, we were playing pool and had some problems with the table eating our cue ball.  The owner came up and fixed it for us (Rush and I) and we sat and had a drink with him while he talked about Tel Aviv and Israel in general.  His first comment was that Tel Aviv was a special city in Israel.  His claim was that most people in the city would be happy to secede from Israel and become their own country.  I'm sure this was in jest, functionally, this would not work well and Israel would never allow it, but his reasons were interesting to me.  He said that most Tel Avivians didn't care a hoot about the conflict, they just wanted it to end.  He claimed not to care if his neighbors were Palestinian/Israeli/Chinese or any other race.  He just wanted to live in peace and the status quo of a strong Jewish controlled state made no difference to him.  This led him to tell us the real reason that the bar was named Rosa Parks.  When he started to explain it to us, we were a bit taken aback because we thought the reasons were lost to history.  Apparently, he is the original owner and there has never been another.  His logic for naming the bar was that he had lived in Brooklyn for several years which is how he learned about Rosa Parks.  He wanted to name his bar something that was not associated with Palestine, Israel, England, or the US.  While Rosa is from the US, she is (was?) an African American, so he felt that was enough of a distinction for her.  It was about a fight for equality and treating everyone the same regardless of any perceived differences between them.

I can put this in perspective by the bar I went to last night.  Yes, that's right.  I do my best social research on subjects who have been drinking.  Also, if you start an interesting conversation with a bartender, they tend to give you free whiskey after a bit.  This guy over at Armadillo right across from our apt (actually, a pretty cool bar with lots of beers on tap.  You should check it out.) was obviously much more conservative and overheard a conversation I was having with Sarah on counter terrorism/insurgency tactics in Iraq/Afghanistan and how that related to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.  This sparked an intense yet very civil and orderly conversation about Israeli security where he demonstrated his conservative nature.  He most certainly would not advocate a liberal stance towards the Palestinians, though the girl working there would.  On the whole, I agree with the owner of Rosa that most people in Tel Aviv are more liberal, but it is also very apparent that the issue is still very raw with many people.  I imagine that much of it has to do with the number of people who have had friends and relatives killed in the various wars and/or terrorist attacks.  How do we fix this?  Well, according to Stevie at the ICT, we need to go back to the one state solution.  Give the entire Middle East to the Jews.  (This is from the guy who also has pictures of various attractive Arab women on the wall with AK-47s and suicide vests on.  It is called the T.I.L.F. list.  It's like a M.I.L.F., only with Terrorists.)

American Perceptions

The project that I'm working on for my internship is on Islamic extremism in the US.  As part of the project, Stevie sent me a paper on extremism in Italy to help me through it.  Reading through it, I was amazed (why I don't know) about the similarities between the situations in the US and Europe.  I have also been looking at the UK and it is the same.  People from other countries are always talking about how Americans think the world revolves around us and nothing happens outside our borders.  This is certainly an overstatement, but it is true to a degree.  Why other developed countries wouldn't have a problem with terrorism is beyond me.  When one thinks about it, it makes sense that they would actually have more of a problem considering that they have a higher population of Muslims than the US (relative to total population) and movement in and out of the EU is easier than the US.  In fact, having looked into the US situation, we seem to have it pretty good. Muslims integrate much more easily into our society than in Europe, mostly because of the heterogeneous makeup of our country.  We care less about maintaining a homogenous society and more about working together.  Sure, racism is still a problem.  Poor Dearborn, MI gets the brunt of anti-Muslim behavior in the US, but for the most part, I like to think that we accept foreigners better than most countries.  The Muslim minority population in the US is more affluent than in any other developed country.  I think that says something about accepting religious differences as far as workweeks and non-discriminatory employment.  There is also the perception of the American dream.  When all second generation immigrants are automatically American citizens as opposed to countries like Germany who have massive populations of immigrants and are not allowed citizenship, they are able to view themselves as American rather than as Chinese or Mexican or Arabs working in America.  This produces a greater feeling of solidarity with the US than it does in European countries.  On the whole, we definitely have the better situation.  However, I think we are also a bigger target in the eyes of the international community because we are more actively involved in world politics and economics than most European countries.  Hence, we think we are the center of the world because, to a degree, much of the world does revolve around what the US does.  It's a shame we don't get better international news on our standard news channels so that the population in general can be better informed about the situations in other countries, but I guess that's why people like us read a lot of news on the internet.

East Jerusalem

I guess this blog is going to be about the rest of the group.  Everyone came to Tel Aviv this weekend for a quick get together.  I have to say, you can tell who is culturally sensitive and here for the experience and who is here for a party atmosphere.  It kind of annoys me to hear people just whinging about how terrible their internships are and their locations.  I'm sure you know who I am talking about, because everyone said they were happy except for the East Jerusalem crowd.  You specifically asked us where we wanted to be and what kind of internship we wanted.  I look at disappointment as the fault of the disappointed.  Not only did they obviously not do any research before they chose a study abroad that could put them IN A MUSLIM COUNTRY, but they are completely unwilling to adapt to the lifestyle.  This really says something about American perceptions on the area and on the conflict.  Some people just refuse to believe that not everyone wants to be American.  I don't think that many of the girls in the West Bank/Gaza/East Jerusalem etc.  even want to be Americanized.  Is it misogynistic, completely male dominated, and it degrades women.  But, you know what, that isn't going to change overnight.  I figure it is at least as disgusting to the women living in these cultures that Americans walk around in short-shorts and tank tops as it is to American women that the woman are living in a male dominated society.  If you don't like it, don't go there.  Like I said, do some research and know what you are getting into.  American's are spoiled.  We have had decades to gradually make our society the way that it is and we expect to be able to change the rest of the world in a weekend.  I can't think of a way to put this better, so I will just say it.  Some societies are not as advanced as we are.  They are not ready for MTV and Lindsey Lohan.  For that matter, maybe they aren't ready for Democracy.  I think it was Socrates who discussed the logical transition of governments.  From Despotism, to Monarchy, to Democracy, to Socialism, to Communism... None of which is a perfect government.  However, we have seen what happens when a society tries to skip a step.  The Soviet Union went horribly wrong without a period of development and democracy before it went into Socialism.  We can't force a transition, it must happen organically and until that time, we must work with them.  Understanding and showing what development has done for us, the quality of life with a relatively educated population and industrialization is the only way to foster that transition.  Education, as always, is the key.  I think we can see that in the Arabs of Israel.  They still want their freedom and their rights, but they don't want to join Palestine and have them bring down the prosperity that being an Israeli citizen has brought them. A gradual transition will introduce new ideas and concepts to the underdeveloped areas.  Industrialization and prosperity will bring about a greater exchange of ideas and they will incorporate the aspects of Western society that they want and scrap the rest.  This is much more plausible than bringing in prefabricated McDonald's and a Planet Hollywood.

Wikileaks

My first assignment at the ICT, after reading a book on CT strategies, is editing a paper on British security through the eyes of the Wikileaks documents.  While I find it interesting, there are two aspects of it I don't care for.  Firstly, the paper is very poorly written.  The author is either a poor writer, or doesn't speak English as a first language.  Much of the paper is cut and copied directly from Wikileaks reports.  In fact, it is glaringly obvious which parts were written by the author and which ones weren't.  I would certainly call it plagerized because much isn't quoted or cited properly either.  I asked that my name not be placed on it even though, after my extensive revisions, it is much better (if I do say so myself).  Stevie doesn't seem bothered by this and I wonder if it has anything to do with a difference in American vs Israeli academic ethics or if it is because that is what he wanted the student/intern to do.  The second issue, and one I tried to explain to him after he assigned the paper, was that as a potential US govt employee, I am not supposed to read any Wikileaks. Most of these were published openly through The Telegraph or other newspapers, so I don't think it will be much of an issue, but I wrote two of my professors to ask their opinion on the issue.  By the time they had gotten back to me, I had already read too much, though, and I am worried that I may have overstepped myself.  The documents were widely circulated enough that I'm sure it won't be a deal breaker for any candidate, but I wish I had insisted on a different project.  It's ironic that I specifically asked not to be placed in the PA because I was worried about a security clearance and it is in Tel Aviv that I run into what I assume will be the biggest stumbling block to one.  I'm sure that I am overreacting, especially since they were all published through the papers, but I have made a point not to go to any more websites regarding them.

The interns themselves are an interesting mix of people.  All are from the US, but only one is going to school at the IDC.  He is considering making Aliya (sp?) in a few years, but waiting until he is old enough that the army won't want him for the full time.  He basically said that if he becomes a citizen in a few years, the army either wont want him or he will only be in for about 6 months.  Those 6 months would mostly be spent making coffee for 1000 shekels a month, which is crazy because I go through more than a 1000 shekels a week here (Yikes! Tel Aviv is not cheap!  But that's my own fault for not eating/drinking at home more).  I was talking to a few IDF girls at a bar the other night and they said the same thing.  They are answering phones and doing secretarial work for about the same amount.  (I felt a moment of sympathy and almost bought them a few rounds of drinks.  However, their boyfriends showed up right around then and saved me some money and any additional resentment.)  I'm not sure how they do it.  I have no idea what combat soldiers in the US get paid, but I think it is a few thousand dollars a month.  I was told that IDF combat troops make less than US$1000 a month, which is crazy.  However, with all the deployments they have in the PA and the Lebanese and Syrian borders, I suppose it is necessary.  Israel is a wealthy country, but doesn't have the kind of cash to spend on its military that the US does, even with billions of dollars in US military aid.

Internship - Week one

My internship is amazing.  I am deeply in debt to you, Yehuda, for selecting this one for me.  Being able to do my own research and potentially get something published will really help out my resume.  The first week, however, has been fairly slow.  Stevie asked me to read a book on counter-terrorism written by one of the faculty at the ICT.  The premise was interesting, mostly that we need a fully comprehensive definition of terrorism before we can truly fight it and the logic behind countries who don't want it standardized.  Basically, in order to condemn terrorist actions and hold states accountable for their support of it, we have to have a legal framework built around the definition in order to bring the issue to a head.  Surprisingly, it is states like Syria and Iran that are the most proactive about forming a true definition because they want to have it written so that it can justify their support of organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah.  They see them as freedom fighters and not terrorists, so their definition will exempt their actions.  However, the US is against a true definition because we don't want to have any legal repercussions against our CT actions and military operations fighting it.  We also support a number of organizations within countries that oppose the regimes we are not friendly with and either of these issues could result in action against us in the international courts or the UN.  

I was generally surprised when I finished reading this because I had imagined that the US would be all for a policy of standardization of the framework against terrorism.  After reading this, though, it makes complete sense from a political point of view.  As the global superpower, we are currently able to operate with impunity in most of the international arena.  I don't see this as just, but it is a fact that we deal with.  From a CT point of view, it also makes sense for us.  When we can operate within the international anarchy, we are able to take the actions that we deem necessary to protect ourselves and our interests.  While defining the concept would have some, limited, benefits, it could be tantamount to shooting ourselves in the foot in the international battle against extremism.  Allowing the government to operate outside a legal framework it excellent for keeping citizens safe from everyone except the government that is trying to protect them.  It removes rights in exchange for protection which is, of course the great dilemma with all security arguments.  How many of your rights are you willing to concede in order to feel safe?  (To paraphrase what one member of the IC told me once: Safety is positively correlated to the number of clothes you have to take off at the airport.)

Yad Vashem and Foreign Ministry

The most interesting thing that struck me at Yad Vashem was how different it was from the museum in DC.  The DC museum focuses on shock and awe whereas Yad Vashem looks at the causes and motivations of both the heroes and perpetrators of the Holocaust.  While the differences between the two of them are important, it was the impressions among the group that made the most impact on me.  I was personally impressed with the guide, but Liz, one of the two Jewish students in our group, was apparently offended by him.  I don't know if it was the manor in which he approached the subject or some other factor, but I thought it was interesting.  While not Jewish myself, I think that it was a fascinating take on the Holocaust, one that would only come after several generations.  While he certainly made a point about the uniqueness of the genocide, the fact that even as the Nazis were losing the war they still made last ditch efforts to kill every Jew that they could, he was still very adamant about keeping any connection between it and any other event separate for that very reason.  Personally, I thought it was difficult to separate what the Nazis did to the Jews before the war, rounding them up with only what they could carry and sending them to live in ghettos, much different from what the Jews did to the Palestinians after '48 and '67.  Obviously the whole genocide part of it is different (though one could make a case that it fits the UN definition if stretched a bit), but there is no doubt that ethnic cleansing took place.

Another parallel that I began to draw from speaking with the Foreign Ministry is that of the religious state.  My basic American values make it very difficult for me to support such a confined nationalistic sentiment in a population.  Only allowing Jews to become new citizens seems more than a little racist to me.  In fact, it's more restrictive than many Islamic Republics.  I respect that the dream of many Holocaust survivors was made reality when Israel was formed, but I personally believe that the idea of a sustainably homogeneous state has died out with globalization.  It is too easy to travel across the world and start a business and raise a family in a new country.  Everyone interacts with everyone.  If a country closes itself off to immigration and restricts itself to such a narrow minded concept, it is doomed to fall behind other countries who are more open.  The whole concept of maintaining an ethnic majority when a quarter of your population is different is ridiculous anyway.  If, in twenty years, a new generation of Israelis haven't taken over from the hardliners, I think that some real problems will manifest themselves in the economy and international opinion of Israeli society.

Israeli Impressions

The first day of the seminar was interesting from a historical perspective.  This is especially true when considering the nature of the guide who took us around the old city.  Being a Jewish woman, I was interested in her take on several issues.  What struck me the most, however, was her description of events at the Western Wall.  After visiting the site, I asked her why the construction of houses stopped and when the renovation of the plaza took place.  I knew full well what happened after the 1967 takeover of Jerusalem, but i wanted to hear what she said.  Her take on it was that after taking control of the Old City, the authorities decided to clear some shoddy old houses from the area and create the plaza.  This was glossed over very quickly and the subject moved on.  She didn't mention the army bringing in bulldozers without approval 48 hours after establishing control.  I thought this was a little irresponsible on her part and not very objective, though I can understand how that might not be some thing she would be particularly proud of.

The next day, seeing the poverty of Hevron was devastating.  The area of the old market and even some of the surrounding areas were at least as bad as I had seen elsewhere in the developing world (Honduras, Nicaragua and Guatemala).  I felt that the discussion was, overall, fairly biased and almost propaganda-esque.  The fact that the man said he was worried that he would be shot if he wasn't with Americans was a little over the top and I find it hard to believe that the settlers regularly throw rocks at Arab children and the soldiers are all monsters who completely ignore this.  I'm sure they aren't nice to each other and that rock throwing happens, but he had a very good reason to distort the facts for the visiting Americans.  Also, the gas bomb that just happened to be lying in the street several days after the incident in the market with the flashbangs was a bit suspicious as well.  The streets were fairly well maintained as far as trash was concerned and I can't believe that they would just leave it there for almost a week when there is surely someone who collects them to record the serial numbers.  All this notwistanding, there is still the very real fact that the wall/checkpoints/etc are certainly bad for the local economy as well as for the convenience of the residents.  I would assume that the raids conducted by the IDF were not for their own amusements, but rather to go after suspected terrorists.  Considering that Hevron is a very Hamas friendly city, this is most likely the case, though I can see how it would appear to be very aggressive to the locals.  The fact of the matter is, though, that the more the Israeli government opressess the local population, the more they will become sympathetic to extremist groups that promise to provide services, improve living conditions, and remove the occupation.  As incomes decrease, many of the residents are left with no other choice.