Talk:West Bank/Archive 1

2422:"During the 1950s, there was significant Palestinian refugee infiltration and terrorism through the Green Line" could perhaps be rephrased to "resistance and terrorism" or "aggression and terrorism" but i do not know the nature of the palestinian activity across the border well enough to tell whether using "resistance" would be an euphemism or not, so others with more knowledge of the activites in the 1950s would have to do that edit. I find it hard to believe that all activity across the border would be called terrorisme from a NPOV, but cant say I really know. I dont find the use in "maintenance of a military presence in the West Bank to reduce Palestinian terrorism ..." problematic, as that sentence is attributed to an Israeli POV. As for whether some reference should be made to accusations of terrorism commited by Israel and Israeli settlers, I dont really see how it should be written into this article. I do agree that some of the activities of armed, extremist settlers could amount to terrorism, but this is not necessarily the right article for such a discussion. I have no problem using the word terrorism when its applied correctly, but if it's used wrongfully to promote an agenda, another word should be chosen. -- 3570:

isn't an issue of eye of the beholder truth, those are facts. The most recent controllers of these two land areas before Israel were egypt and Jordan. So, it seems the calls for a Palestinian State on "Palestinian Land" conveniently started when Israel came into possession of these lands. Does anyone disagree with this? WOuld someone like to cite for me the calls for a Palestinian State when these lands were controlled by their respective Arab states? Were these Arab states advocating for Statehood for Palestinians when they controlled the land? We all know the answer is "no". None of this should really impact where the world goes from here on in. The present situation and the best remedy should be the only consideration. I would only ask that there be accuracy in reporting who controls (or controlled) what land. Palestinians never controlled anything, they only lived on the land, and if living on land constitutes ownership then I would like to stake my claim of "ownership" on the Island of Manhattan. Everyone lieks to quote international law and UN resolutions and say Israel violated them, but when the argument is made that Palestinians never legally owned ANY land that is called "zionist" and "racist".

3376:

events happen there (especially these days). But as far as the West Bank is concerned, most references to specific locations are usually "the Nablus district" or "the Hebron area", etc. The term "West Bank" is used more when citing a foreign source, for example, "Ariel Sharon promised to dismantle four settlements in the northern West Bank". It's all depending on context, and usually the context from our point of view is "Palestinian territories" rather than "the West Bank". When the West Bank needs to be specified, it is called in Arabic "Al-Difa Al-Gharbiyah", literally, "the West Bank", or sometime "Al-difa" (the Bank) alone for short. This is similar to Israeli press, where, for example, they refer to the "governor of the Judea and Samaria region" or to "demonstrations erupted today in Judea and Samaria", but when citing a different context, will say, for example, "Elections are scheduled next week for the Palestinian local councils in villages in the southern West Bank".

1481:

were recognized and utilized by the international community as late as November 1947 (via the delimitation reference thereto in United Nations General Assembly Resolution no. 181, commonly known as the Palestine Partition Plan, in Part II thereof, entitled “Boundaries”, at Section A thereof, entitled “The Arab State”). However, when Transjordan (precursor to Jordan), illegally seized Judea and Samaria (and the eastern portion of Jerusalem) during its 1948 invasion of Israel, the media universally began treating Judea and Samaria as if they were inseparable and permanent parts of Jordan, rather than corpora separata temporarily under Arab military occupation. Only after Israel's reclamation of these lands in 1967 (during its repulsion of an attempt by Syria, Jordan and Egypt to invade and annihilate the Jewish State) did the media suddenly recognize (or remember) their geo-political distinctness -- but only as the "West Bank". -- Mark Rosenblit, December 19, 2005

3479:

of it. (Another interesting trivia sidelight - perhaps it even has some obscure relation :-) - the Foreign Minister of Pakistan at (around) that time was a formerly Jewish survivor of Hitler's camps that had converted to Islam (This I do recall a source for - Tariq Ali's Clash of Fundamentalisms) I remember reading something just a couple of weeks ago (might have been somewhere in The Arab-Israeli Conflict ed.by J.N. Moore a compendium of international law articles on the conflict) that gave pretty old but conflicting sources, perhaps the actual source(s) of the story - not primary ones though - one indicating that Iraq , one indicating that Pakistan had recognized the annexation - but seeming to express a bit of doubt on either. Iraq makes more sense to me, as both Jordan and Iraq were ruled by Hashemite relatives at the time. There are Knesset debates at

3234:. There have been many terrors throughout history that have come about through the process of dehumanization, which is desensitization of the general population to crimes or atrocities done by leaders against other people through the dissemination of lies. The Hutus referred to the Tutsis as "cockroaches" in order to desensitize people to the fact that they are actual human beings, for example. And there are much more abhorrent examples that most people have learned about in history books. I cannot help but take a stance against such opinions on talk pages, I presume most people would too. In the case of the Palestinian schoolbooks, it is a very noteworthy subject for me having grown up with them and having never seen whatever people claim they contain, and I can only view such claims as malicious at best, but I won't elaborate more. 2223:

both Jerusalem and Hebron (And though I doubt the relevance, it may be of interest that many mixed Palestinian Jewish/Arab families exist within the Palestinian Arab society). Another point which I'd like to raise for discussion is that the statement "...generally do not interact with the local Palestinian population as they form part of Israeli rather than Palestinian society" is not entirely true. Aside from the interaction which can be inferred from my comments above, neighboring Israeli and Palestinian settlements/towns often have economic relationships (almost all Israeli West Bank construction and services are provided by Palestinians), and mutual attendance at weddings etc. was very common, though I admit that such interaction has (temporarily?) dropped off recently due to the issues surrounding the Intifadeh.

310:--- As I noted in the article, the terms Judea and Samaria are primarily geographical: Samaria is less mountainous than Judah and of a slightly different geological composition. (I can go on and on about how this was reflected in the ancient history of the region due to resulting economic differences, populations, etc., but I will not at this point.) In fact, both terms also refer to territories that constituted part of pre-1967 Israel, such as the corrdidor leading to Jerusalem, the foothills surrounding Beit Guvrin, the southern Judean Desert (Judah), and the eastern strip of foothills along the coastal strip, including the town of Zichron Yaakov (Samaria). Of course, Israelis realize that the term "Judea and Samaria" refers to the West Bank, but the Hebrew equivalent of 3323:

such as "the first of it's kind in Palestine" or "being screened in Palestine for the first time", which is irrelevant to Israel proper because such slogans would not apply there (i.e. it would have happened in Israel before). "West Bank" is less commonly used unless there is a specific reason to single it out from Gaza. That bottom paragraph is mostly about Israeli and Jewish references, with one sentence at the end that discusses Palestinian objections. As such, the way this article stands now is highly unneutral, and in fact is not even a compromise edit because it almost completely ignores the majority population of the territory and is written from an anti-Palestinian presence point of view. It will need to be fixed.

603:

Israeli propaganda tactic to refer to extraterritorial areas under Israeli military control as "disputed territories" so as to semantically minimize their militant aggression for Jewish settlement Lebensraum. Those who believe that Israel should annex additional Arab land prefer to regard the territories as "disputed" rather than "occupied" because "occupation" is legally temporary whereas "disputed" territories may someday be absorbed by Israeli expansion. Even the Israeli Supreme Court ruled in June 2004 that the territories are held by Israel through "belligerent occupation". The term Occupied Territories is legitimate and correct in a legal sense of international law. "Disputed territory" is POV.

1395:

article. By Annexation, As I said, The International Community not even recognize Jerusalem or the Golan Heighs as part of Israel, so I think that is better stated as a "Nationalistic Aim": Israelies have that goal. The real problem is how they are going to achieve it. About the maps, I said it once and i said it again, it is not necesarely part of the main topic. About the Arab State, I believe that is right to stated that a part of the West Bank was seized during the Israel War of Independence, and that also contribute (with the Jordan Army invading what was left of the land) to explain why a government wasn´t created.

2353:. Quite frankly, I hadn't even noticed the use of the word in this article. Just to make matters clear: I do not think the use of the word "terrorism" in this article, without attribution of who has used the term, is useful. In particular, besides the first vague reference ("The West Bank has been the object of negotiation, terrorism, and war") the other two references refer to Palestinian "terrorism". No acknowledgment is made that some Israeli tactics (for example, bulldozing homes, beating people) might also be characterized that way. Further, it could easily be construed that 1777:

article about Jordan history. About the map, I'm talking about the map of the UN Particion Plan, the one that stated about the status of Jerusalem as a separated international administered territory (sort of like the Free State of Danzing) and the proposed Jewish State and the Proposed Arab State. About that, that remainds me that the explanation about why the so call "Arab Stated" never materialize was becouse of the severe fighting betwen the Israeli military and the Jordan Army on CisJordania. That is something that should be stated in this article.

196:

boundaries based on an armistice agreement--if the agreement were signed the next day, the boundaries would have been different), nomenclature (Judea and Samaria do not equal the West Bank. They are names for geographical regions of which the West Bank is part. However, the Israeli city of Beit Shemesh is also Judea and Zichron Yaakov is also Samaria, while the Palestinian town of Jenin is part of the Jezreel Valley), etc. Only once the facts and definitions are accurate can we begin any discussion of politics, for whatever side.

1117:

the late 19th century through to the 1940's, there was massive Jewish immigration to Palestine, and that immigration was opposed by the indigenous population and also by Britain; that as late as 1948, the year in which Israel was created as a state, the ratio of Arab to Jew in Palestine was more than 2 to 1; that some 800,000 Palestinians were kicked out of their homeland in 1948; and so on. The aim of this page should be to tell the truth, not give an obviously one-sided reading (i.e., Zionist reading) to an important issue.

219:

was Defense Minister, when Israel withdrew from the Sinai, and he commanded the soldiers that removed the settlers). Positions generally change based on current events. One day after a bombing, most people in Israel will refuse to even accept the notion of a Palestinian state. One day after a concilliatory speech by Arafat, 60% of Israelis will agree to divide Jerusalem. By the way, the same is true of Palestinians. In other words, the positions themselves are in flux, which is nowhere recognized in the article as it stands.

31: 3505:

there is no historical evidence to support this assertion,..."3 referring to "3. A serious and pioneering refutation of this allegation can be found in Sanford R. Silverburg, “Pakistan and the West Bank: A research note”, Middle Eastern Studies, vol.19, no.2, April 1983, pp.261-263. The allegation, however, persists." So the article should probably state something like "although very many sources state that Pakistan ..., this is apparently false", referring to these sources. --

464:

case "Cis-Jordan" not being used as a name but rather as a qualifier on the name "Palestine". In 1950 there is an op-ed piece that uses "Cis-Jordan" as a name, clearly referring to the whole region west of the Jordan River. In 1975 there is an article quoting Sadat in which he uses "cis-Jordan" as a name for the West Bank. That's all. By way of comparison, "Transjordan" appears 2263 times (starting in 1921) and "Palestine" appears 55927 times (starting in 1789). --

115:

is part of the Biblical land of Israel, and therefore can never be negotiated with. You statements reveals not only a disagreement with the Arab position (which I share), but a strong disagreement against Jews who are not sympathetic to the right-wing of the Israeli political spectrum. Not all Zionists (Jews or gentiles) support the Likud or other rightist parties. (I think they have some good points, but I am more to the left of their positions.)

4156:

objections to "Judea and Samaria" are nationalistic, whereas I doubt the Israeli explanation involves a history lesson, it is probably just as nationalistic. I say "probably" because I have found no source over the internet that states that Israelis object to the term "Palestine" because it was a Roman era name. Could you please provide a source that says so? Until then, I have removed both the Palestinian reason and the Israeli reason.

1474:

unintelligent viewpoint Judea and Samaria implies a more neutral historical perspective. I could see how one would disagree if coming from a secular persepective due to the terms biblical routes, but due to the fact that Muslim theology as well as Jewish Theology mutually accept this history it seems more neutral than any other term advocated in this message board- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverberg (approx 8 Oct 2005)

315:

are the Hebrew names for the region. Anecdotally, I remember watching the newscast in the early 1980s, when the Israeli government decided officially that the territories would be called Judea and Samaria in all official broadcasts (there was only one TV station at the time and four official radio stations). The snicker on the newscaster's face was obvious to everyone. The decision has since been ignored.

1970:(Moving left). I put no more into "conquer" than the dictionary does; remember, you asked me to consult it? As for "incorporate", you put more into it than is found in the dictionary; it states nothing about the process being "peaceful". And my interpretation of "liberate" assumes no POV, unless you assume the POV that the Iraqi, Syrian, Egyptian, etc. armies were not foreign - is that your position? 1182:"complaints" about Israel: it is the international community. It is the Palestinian people, who have lost their homes, their neighborhoods, their families, their heritage. (What do you think the phrase "right of return" refers to?) The fact is that Israel has violated over 100 U.N. Resolutions since 1955, and the rest of the world considers the West Bank occupied rather than disputed territory. Thanks. 4129:. Nothing has changed in the geo-political status quo that would necissitate a change on wikipedia. Israel still controls the area of the 'West Bank'/Judea and Samaria, and it has not (yet) retreated or even officially expressed, through a knesset vote, a desire to retreat from this area. I don't think the discussion is relevant until at least, some sort of consistant declaration is made. -- 3126:

land area. They also have little voice in the United Nations which supports the "professional refugees" of Palestinians and provides financial support for hate-dominated Palestinian schools where students are taught that the entire area between the River Jordan and the sea is theirs and that Jews have no rights at all. All Jews are to be killed and the country of Israel destroyed.

4336:

Bank but was abroad (for study or work) lost their residency rights and were unable to return, which meant that a significant portion of educated West Bank Palestinians would not be considered by Israel as "West Bankers" in 1970. If the 1% figure is true, it is a forced reset of the counter to zero as many students and educated people were abroad and stayed abroad after 1967.

740:

resolutions are non-binding and non-enforcable. In addition, I find it difficult to reconcile your often reasonable article edits with your highly combative, propagandistic, and often insulting Talk: comments. Why not just deal with the issues themselves, instead of promoting your beliefs about the moral failings and political beliefs of the editors who disagree with you?

598:

recognition?). Give a lat long description (or topographical map) of the area and a description of the disputing parties and their impact on aboriginal populations, flora and fauna and that's it. Let the reader draw their own conclusions. Posting anything else is giving a mouthpiece for the disputing parties. History is written by it's survivors...

4177:(Concurring with this first point...) We keep having this recurring claim that the Romans were the first to use the name Palestine, but isn't related to "Philistine", a name far predating the Roman Empire? In any case, one would do well to remember that 100 years ago, Jews including Zionists quite happily used the term "Palestine" for the region. -- 1142:

violation of literally dozens of U.N. Resolutions going back 50 years, and has been condemned by even American allies; that 3) the rest of the world considers the West Bank to be occupied rather than disputed territory. The Israeli and Zionist points of view SHOULD be given, but not at the expense of the rest of the picture. Thank you.

3390:

acknowledge the Palestinians as having any critical role or presence in the territory, save for some obscure sentences. This is a typical pattern where writers sympathetic to the stronger power in a conflict will conveniently omit certain details, whereas those sympathetic to the oppressed will insist on adding certain details.

4395:, for "liberated judea" or "liberated samaria"; that gets 224 hits. Most of the usages in your search seem to be of the form, "When Israel liberated..."; actually referring to it as "liberated XXX" seems vanishingly rare, especially in comparison to the rest of the adjectives used in that sentence ("occupied" and "disputed"). -- 1904:

overcoming obstacles or opposition *conquered the mountain* 4 : to overcome by mental or moral power : SURMOUNT *conquered her fear* intransitive verb : to be victorious ñcon£quer£or \-k*r-*r\ noun " This obviously better describes what happened than "incorporated", and is not biased at all. Check your dictionary. --

1678:

Ocupation of the ... article is clearly a POV, just by the fact that inside that article the name of Judea and Samaria is used for the territory. There is no article regarding the occupatio by Israel (and I believe is not appropiate too) of the West Bank, so I see no point in adding another controversial link to the page.

4160:

also use original research to tell you that if I drive south-west from Ramallah, I come to a settler bypass road on which I cannot drive on and have to turn back. So we'll have to find sources for our claims other than our original research, which is not allowed, and I have now attached sources to my edits.

1286:

is not impartial. Please, take just a few moments to read what I have write in the article and we can discuss each one of them in a polite and civilized way, rather than imposing each others articles in the page. the First Change that I made, I made it with the idea of shape the article, not to destroy it.

4490:

The West Bank and Gaza Strip articles should be merged and the WB and GS should be treated as one territorial unit as agreed in Oslo II. In addition, the are both linked because the are Palestinian territories and should be treated as a country (not a soverign state) because they are the current home

4197:

it was the British, not the Jews, who reffered to it as Palestine, during the ages, the Jews have always called it either "Eretz Hakodesh" (holy land), Tzion (Zion) or Eretz Israel (the land of Israel). furthermore, even during the British mandate, the Jewish agency insisted that the British attached

3180:

Absolute nonsense - I know these books, but I assume you don't even know Arabic - but if it makes you feel better claiming this just for purposes of dehumanization to justify continued subjugation, you're free to do so. Furthermore, there is no point to being "taught" to kill Israelis in schools when

3125:

Jews have every right to be where they are and have for the most part accepted the partition. They were there before Islam and before Christianity. They have NEVER given up their claim to the land. Unfortunately, Jews are a small populaltion controlling none of the World's oil and very little of the

3117:

The article states that the names Judea and Samaria are bibical. They are bibical in the same sense that Galilee, Jerusalem, Bethehem, and others are bibical. The names were in common usage until Jordan invaded the area and re-named them as "West Bank of Jordan", now shortened to just "West Bank".

2320:

The history section should, and does, start a couple of years earlier; there's no reason to cover the Ottomans or the early mandate, but every reason to clarify that, as the article says and this map illustrates, "A part of the pre-1948 Mandatory Palestine, the territories now known as West Bank were

2233:

If you can cite a verifiable source, sure. But make sure you are not referring to Jerusalem Palestinians who live in places like Ramallah/Bethlehem, since they are not Israeli citizens and therefore are not "Israeli Arabs". Do you have evidence of significant numbers of Israeli Arabs choosing to live

2222:

In the Demography section, it sounds as if Israelis on the West Bank live only in settlements. Would anyone object to noting that there are large populations of Israeli Arabs which dwell within the Palestinian Arab population centers? How about that Israeli Jews dwell within Palestinian Arab areas in

2066:

I'd have no problem with "captured", but why aren't the lands taken over by Jordan and Egypt similarly characterized? Didn't the 1947 UN partition plan anticipate a separate Arab state in the portion of Mandate Palestine not allocated to Israel? (I promise that I have no hidden agenda in asking this,

1349:

In Status, Both sides have a exagerated POV, Israeli and Arab about the maps. That is why I deleted, since it does not contribute with the article at all. Also, at the beginning of the article, I stated "failed negotiations, long-term violence, and in some cases, war." becouse the term applied are to

1100:

One existing country does claim at least parts of the West Bank are integral to it; Israel, which claims the area around Jerusalem, and has annexed them. Israel also grants citizenship rights to those Palestinians living in the annexed area. Other Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza are citizens

995:

I provided a source explaining why your interpretation of international law is invalid and why "Occupied Territories" is correct terminology. If you can't support your case and just throw your hands up in the air when faced with facts refuting your extremist position, why do you believe you should be

566:

The West Bank is supposed to be a large part of future free Palestine. UN dicided this in 1947, no government in the world recognizes the israeli occupation, and Israel it self has not anexed it. There should not be any doubt that the West Bank and Ghaza are palestinian territories, and will never be

421:

The page has recently been protected I'd like to ask, why? And furthermore, I would like to ask for an explanation from 81 and Viajero as to why you have deleted my edits without providing a reason. You have yet to give any reason, much less one showing why you think they are inaccurate, off topic or

395:

A palestinian is for me everyone who answers my question "inta meen wayn?" (where are you from?) with "Ana filasteeni" (I am Palestinian). I suppose some 100% of the people in Westbank and Gaza (excluding Israeli settlers) would answer thusly (or "ana filastiniyyeh" for women). Some 50% of the people

314:

is simply a translation of the English term, with no historical or geographical meaning prior to 1948. Even Israelis who support total withdrawal from the Territories would call the areas either Judea or Samaria, when referring to them historically or geographically--political exigencies aside, those

4159:

I didn't write the part about the highways, but noticed it after you edited it. You are claiming something different from what I'm saying: I say that some highways are closed to Palestinians, you are saying all are open with the proper permit. You used original research for your route 5, and I could

3728:

If these terms were hardly ever used, I'd agree, but they're used by millions of people all over the world (though particularly in Israel), either in English or Hebrew, so it's a significant-minority usage, and politically important. The issue of which part of that area will end up with what name is

3573:

If you look into a lot of the historical documentation, until the initial Intifadeh of the 80's Palestinians enjoyed some of the greatest freedoms under Israeli rule than they ever did in any Arab state. Lets look at some other facts...While any Palestinians death is horrible, Israel has killed far

3322:

Well, depends on context - the official apparatus (newspapers, etc) refers to the West Bank as the "al-aradi al-falastiniyah", or the "Palestinian Lands" to differentiate between the West Bank (and Gaza) and Israel proper. It is referred to as "Falastin" when discussing political or cultural events,

3216:

While the opinions expressed by Emil Schafer are clearly controversial, they are not neccassarily inaccurate, they do undoubtedly indicate a non neutral POV so obviously they have no place in the article, I do however found it equally unnessasary for user Ramallite to use personal attacks on Schafer

2982:

I think there is one: the page talking about the ocupation of the West Bank by Jordan. At least that article deal with the political and international implications that the jordanian annexation caused to this territory. Why not creating one that involves the currently israeli one?. Well, at least in

2710:

Ironic to say that the israeli side qualify most of Palestinian actions as "terrorism" then, and not of "War". Both sides have extremist (like the assassination of Rabin by a Jewish Zealot), and both sides are in some way responsable for what is happening. So the word Terrorism, if its used, must be

2333:

I understand the need to provide the historical backround, and a map would definitley help illustrate this, but I could see how and evil zionist Jew would be angry at the word "seized" which appears in the right half of the proposed Map, I believe a more neutral word is both neccessary and possible

1894:"Conquered" implies illegal armed seizure, so can hardly be seen as unbiased. The mirror image of "conquered" is "liberated", which I think you would hardly agree as neutral. "Incorporated" implies no legality whatsoever, but merely describes the action, and is obviously an unbiased, neutral term. 1581:

I'm deleting most of my previous talks in order to state more clear a NPOV and not mix them (or be confused) with personal attacks. In Fact, the improvements that were reverted are considered impartial and that contribute more to the article. I would like to see why they don't.Please. I urge you to

1555:

a good reason to made good article which depicts an accurate description of events surrounding West Bank. Philosophers on ancient greece believed about perfection it is beyond maths or even wise people, people cant be wise at all in our days, but at least we can try to be polite and respect everyone

1181:

COMMENT: I'll be happy, when I have the time, to click on those other links and see what you mean by "dealt with at length." The line of yours above -- "any of the other complaints you have about Israel that you think are so important to address" -- is both hilarious and galling. It is not I who has

1159:

COMMENT: Truth most certainly is not "in the eye of the beholder." Truth is what is so about something. It may be difficult to discern or ascertain, and different people may disagree about what is true about something, but the truth is still the truth. Viewpoints may be divergent and many, but truth

1116:

NOTE: This article is horribly biased. One would not know, for instance, that there was an indigenous population in Palestine before, during, and after Ottomon rule; that according to Zionism's founder, Theodor Hertzl, Argentina was seriously considered as a possible homeland for the Jews; that from

762:

You have not improved. Your edits reflect a narrow-minded, virulently Zionist POV. You are not amenable to NPOV edits that offend your Zionist sensibilities. You stalk my history of contributions looking to revert edits with which you disagree. Your tone is condescending and patronizing. Interacting

703:

be an occupying power in any of Palestine (though it could be so in, for example, Lebanon). There is a further complication that much of the territories are under Palestinian administrative rule. International law is itself a complicated thing, and there has been no "Supreme Court" decision on the

546:

Gave a bit of information on the dispute about whether East Jerusalem is in the West Bank or not. By the definition above, it is. Israel says it isn't. Most Arabs say it is. Most of the negotiations treat it de facto like it isn't, since the Jerusalem issue is negotiated separately from the rest

463:

I'll just record the results of a search for "Cisjordan" in the Times (London) electronic archive, which includes the full text of that newspaper from 1785 to 1985. The word appears only 4 times in total. A 1939 article and a letter in 1948 refer to "Transjordan and Cis-Jordan Palestine". In that

451:

First, I did not put in the original argument against the Saudi proposal. I don't think it should be part of the page either, but I didn't touch it. Glad we agree there. Second, if we add that it refers to the area occupied by Jordan in 48, we don't need to include excludes the Gaza Strip. Second, I

274:

As for the Jordan River, the West Bank only occupies two-thirds of the Bank of the Jordan River running from the Sea of Galilee. The rest was part of Israel's border with Jordan since independence. The West Bank is also nowhere near the northern part of the Jordan River, above the Sea of Galilee. If

178:

More generally, I think an article on terminology would be useful. However, I think we need to use the normal terms for these things -- the terms most English-speakers will be expecting. Otherwise, we'll just confuse the reader. And as to terms such as "Palestinian", whatever its conontations, there

137:

I think the Arab side has won a propaganda victory that will be exceedingly hard for Israel to reverse. Getting the US media to refer to Arab separatists in Israel as "Palestinians" is not really neutral, in my opinion. The term itself implies that only Arab residents of historical Palestine are its

4315:

An editor added a section under "Higher education" stating that the number of Palestinians in the West Bank who had attained an education above 13 years stood at 1% in 1970 and 14% in 1986. I am going to remove this quote and replace it with another more general statement for the following reasons:

3569:

Everyone is saying alot about the West Bank. I want to make a very simple point about what is commonly referred to as "Palestinian Land". The Gaza Strip was under egyptian control until it was lost to Israel in the 67 war. The west bank was under jordanian control until lost to Israel as well. This

3478:

I agree that there are many, many sources that say this. But no one seems to know why - nobody has a Pakistani statement or a reference to one. I saw on the net several years ago an article written by a Pakistani diplomat stating that he could not find any source for this, and disputing the truth

3121:

As to Palestinian rejecttion of Judea and Samaria as "expansionist aims", at the time of the partition, the new government of Israel accepted the truncated partition, the Muslims did not and launched aggressive war on the new state of Israel. Israel did NOT occupy the so-called West Bank until the

1800:

The Jordanian annexation was recognized by exactly two countries in the world, Pakistan and the United Kingdom. All other countries considered it illegal. As for the rest, the history of the West Bank is obviously relevant to the West Bank; the first 20 years of it's existence it was occupied and

1639:

Should not be included in that part of the article, since this are part of a completely different topic. At least not in this sections. A reorganization of Links is needed. Why cant we create a especial section dedicated to the "Israeli Government" Links and another towards the different oppinions.

1355:

Instead of terrorism (wich, in the Israeli-Palestinian conflic is extremely controvertial) I stated violence, a more neutral term (since the Arab world claim that Israel is conducting "State Terrorism" and the Israeli claims that Palestinians are the Terrorist) wich is not endorsing or excusing any

1285:

If you read carefully my changes, most of them do not contradict the previous statements, I´m just only making it more impartial. The other part, It may have sound offensive. I accept it and appologise. But I have read almost the entire TALK page and reach to the conclussion that your point of view

1168:

Well, whatever the truth is, it's not something Knowledge can decide, or even tries to. Instead, Knowledge attempts to present referenced POVs on an issue from different perspectives. As for the article, it's not about U.N. resolutions, or any of the other complaints you have about Israel that you

1051:

The West Bank is in an unusual legal situation; it was owned by the Ottoman Empire, which no longer exists. It was then controlled under a British and League of Nations mandate, both of which have expired. It was occupied and annexed by Jordan, but Jordan has since repudiated ownership. It is now

739:

International law doesn't agree with you, and the U.N. certainly did not create Israel; rather, the inhabitants of Israel created the country in an act of auto-emancipation. The U.N. took a vote, but did nothing at all to support the results of that vote, which only strengthens the point that G.A.

542:

Described the territory as the land west of the River Jordan annexed by Jordan in 1949. An alternate description is "the territory formerly part of Jordan captured by Israel in the 1967 war", but I like the 1949 explanation better because it's more definitional—the West Bank really came into being

403:

Elian is completely correct. I'll go further and say that it is quite objectionable to question the right of the Palestinians to define themselves, just as all other groups have the right to define themselves. (This doesn't concern the different issue of the historical meanings of the word, which

144:

My personal analysis of all statements by all sides leads me to believe that the various Arab power groups frankly intend to wipe out Israel altogether. I agree with the author of the "temporary measure" article (although I also agree with Larry that its title at least is not NPOV). The strategy of

133:

Perhaps we need an article on Middle East political terminology. Often the name of something carries a connotation. For example, the terms "gay rights" and "woman's right to choose" inherently connote positions of favoring certain legal rights for homosexual citizens and the legal right for a woman

114:

This is incorrect. Not only "pro-Arab" people refer to this territory as the West Bank. Many people who are pro-Israel nonetheless do not use the terms "Judea" and "Samaria", as these terms are often used by the right-wing nationalists; to them these names imply that every inch of land in this area

4155:

policy page. I do not dispute that "Palestine" was used in the Roman era. What I dispute is that if I were to ask a typical Israeli why they object to "Palestine", that I would get the response that you wrote. Retorting that the Palestinian claim is "more dubious" is not valid, because Palestinian

3251:

Also in reference to the sopposed maps that show all territories in question as part of Israel proper, I am going to have to agree with Schafer and say that these maps do not exist other than perhaps a few fringe groups that print maps of Eretz Israel in the Internet. I have however seen official

1886:

The word "incorporated" is IMO much more biased, I think the word "conquered" should be used, as that only implies the areas were taken in an armed conflict, which is the case. The word "seized" might by someone be interpreted in direction of stealing, while "incorporated" implies recognized legal

1727:

Yes, I think is more neutral. the Occupation by Israel of the West Bank is an ongoing event. About the Jordan one, I think that we should remove it in order to analize it separately from this one. About the Barrier, is better leaving of the main topic of discussion. What about the map? it could be

1361:

Also, when Israel declare its independence from the British Mandate, It seized more territory that the UN assign for it, clearly in an attemp to defend itself from the arab armies but also one of the main factors of why the Palestinian State failed to materialize. I believa that that is a historic

1120:

NOTE THE NOTE ABOVE: Even if this article is biased, which I do doubt, the Jews are not some kind of immigrants of an area where the Palestinians are "supposed" to live. If you would be a bit more educated or not "biased", Jews lived in that area for a long long time, but of course you do not know

754:

This is not a shoe store or cobbler's shop. You have definitely gotten better at avoiding blatant POV, particularly compared to your earlier edits. Talk pages are indeed the place to discuss the propagandistic biases of articles, but not the place to discuss your beliefs about the moral failings

485:

Before you proceed to delete my entry again, perhaps you could specify what part of it in your opinion constitutes a POV, and prove that it has no factual basis. What part do you object to? That the majority are refugees, or that they fled voluntarily? Just because certain facts speak in Israel's

218:

Don't be too trusting. It is such an oversimplification, that it is really not very valuable. You cannot pigeonhole the views in that way--what is Sharon's view, for example? He has agreed to the idea of a Palestinian state in principle and actually participated in a withdrawal from land (1982, he

186:

I just wanted to add that I am pro-Israel, and I refer to land in question as the "West Bank". In my Jewish School, our Modern Zionism course also refers to it as the "West Bank". Thus, that term is not only used by pro-Arab people. However, there should be a note in the article stating that small

155:

My only suggestion is that the religious leaders meet in good faith to work out the historical and theological issues, and that the politicians respect whatever agreement the religious leaders can work out. This may sound naive, but I am optimistic since East and West Germany managed to reconcile.

4335:

the West Bank. During Jordanian rule, all seekers of higher education had to go abroad for their degrees, and a significant percentage of them (if not the majority) stayed outside for work to be able to send money home. When Israel captured the area in 1967, almost everybody who was from the West

4284:

1. out of the arab Universities in the west bank, the 2 most prominent ate Bethlehem, which is a memeber of the catholic church organization (and partially financed by the Vatican), and Bir Zeit, in which the Hamas wins the student elections regularly. I am not sure what the situation is in other

3504:

by P. R. Kumaraswamy from the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University. From the first paragraph of the intro, page 8: "Pakistan is often accused of being the only country apart from the United Kingdom to have recognized Jordan’s annexation of the West Bank in 1950. Even though

3107:

Ramallite, I understand why you desire to express your point of view but your usage of qualitive statements about the racism desire to maintain the demographic balance is both superfluous and quite harmful to your argument. It clearly indicates your bias and presents the situation for ad hominid

3058:

Actually, many Israelis believe in the two-state solution because of genuine desire for peace and /or the so called "demographic problem" (which is actually pretty racist but...). Wanting to pull out of the occupied territories just to stop attacks is not quite accurate in most situations, and is

2787:

What have we got here? The doves have "hopes of ending Arab attacks". The hawks "reduce Palestinian terrorism". No "hopes" in the latter, you will notice, and no "reduce terrorism" in the former. The two are presumably trying to achieve the same goal. If there's no need to mention terror in one,

1550:

dont have motherland at all, so i think the concern of this article goes beyond of deleting parts. its about trying to get an impartial point of view. Sometimes there are people who actually dont check up their sources like wikipedia manual to write an article say. However i think everyone should

1480:

The media universally refers to Judea and Samaria only as the "West Bank", despite the fact that Judea and Samaria are the correct English-language historical designations for those geographic portions of the Land of Israel, and despite the fact that these English-language historical designations

1163:

In this article on the West Bank there is no mention at all that Israel is in violation of countless U.N. Resolutions, and no mention of many similar (perhaps unpleasant) facts. It just simply isn't good enough to say that other articles allude to these facts. These facts should be stuck right in

1023:

For readability, I switched back to the far left. Jayjg, thanks for your attempt to answer - but you only state that the status is confusing and disputed. But that can only be the case, if there are different possibilities. Why is it so difficult to explicitely state these. Should I try some wild

597:

I believe the wikipedia should reflect humanities perspective on the world not a pro-anyone view and the corresponding terminology. Delete all "West Bank" and similar disputed territory links and replace with "Disputed Territory". Using the term disputed territory has its own risks (maybe use UN

339:

I was present by chance ;-) I also reverted your move of "Palestinian refugee" as I consider the Arab superfluous. You should be aware that it is solely Israeli policy to avoid speaking of Palestinians ("there are no Palestinians" - Golda Meir) and instead use the general term Arabs. By using the

278:

I thank you both, Danny and Uriyan, for your attention to this article. Danny, might I persuade you to enumerate some of the more popular viewpoints on the region's disposition? You seem to have command of the specifics such as division of Jerusalem that I glossed over. (I note with pride that my

3754:

the "East Sea". It's not that the usage of "Judea and Samaria" is minor, but that we should have only one article about the region, to include details about all views. I don't think we should separate out the information under a different title; you should be able to learn everything under one

3681:

Jayjg, I'm referring to the editors who advocate the expulsion of all Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza. It is those same people who would oppose any merge of Judea and Samaria with this article, as they have their own ideas about what Judea and Samaria is. I'm saying there's an unusual

3586:

I suggest you all read Michael Oren's book "6 days of War"... and before you start whining about biases please flip to the back of the book and view the Works cited section. This individual is fluent in multiple languages and was able to review old soviet documents and has interviews with former

3375:

I wouldn't say that the West Bank is "rarely" singled out, but it is "usually" not mentioned in favor of "al-aradi al-falastiniyah" as that is the normal term used for the occupied territories. In fact, "Gaza Strip" is more commonly singled out in the press just because it's smaller and a lot of

2321:

mostly part of the territory reserved by the 1947 Partition Plan (UN General Assembly Resolution 181) for an Arab state." In any case, the partition plan is of interest here as the first proposed territorial division in which the outlines of something approximating the "West Bank" can be seen. -

711:

The territories are not considered merely "disputed" by anyone except those with the POV of militant Israelis who hope to annex more Arab land to the Jewish state. To the rest of the world, the territories are recognized as Occupied Territories because they are militarily occupied by Israel even

654:

Moreover United Nations General Assembly resolutions do not create International law. Alberuni's statements about the Israeli Supreme Court are also not relevant, since the Israeli Supreme Court does not decide Israeli policy, nor did it rule on the relevant issues. Here, in fact, is a position

3526:

Yeah, I know. Why would anyone make something like this up? I would like to know how a nefarious scheme could be based on this useless piece of misinformation. There's an amazing amount of such errors, lies and propaganda creeping into even honest histories of the conflict, but this one is a

3093:

This one I'm sure on - the ones who want a two state solution are mostly pro-peace with for the desire not to be occupiers or to guarantee a Jewish majority. The ones who complain of "Arab Attacks" (almost forgot who occupies who for a moment) are the ones who advocate forceful retaliation, not

1776:

Jordan Annexation was widely recognize around the world (even the annexation of the Gaza Strip by Egipt was recognize too) but not the Israeli one. And I don't think that by adding that link we are making a more NPOV article. Jordan Anenexation (or occupation) must be analized separately on the

1655:

I'm fine with removing Palestine if you want, but what's wrong with the other "See also"s? They're specifically about the West Bank, or things in it? As for the Links, there is only one link from the Israeli government; why would you want to separate it from the other links in its own special

1469:

Judea and Samaria refer to the different tribes who lived there; Judea is where the tribe of Judah settled, Samaria where the Samaritans were (and still are); they have nothing to do with any expansionist or nationalist aims but are historical/biblical terms. (apparently anonymous, 16 May 2005)

1394:

But Terrorism is not a fact in that specific case. Both sides can put examples that they percieve as "terrorist acts". Anyways, I think that Violence should be include (since not all the problems that are part of the West Bank are Terrorism) as a way to Neutralize the impact of Terrorism in the

602:

The Occupied Territories are known as the Occupied Territories because that is their legal status and the phrase used by the UN. The Israeli government is militarily occupying territory that is not within the internationally recognized borders of Israel - hence, "Occupied Territories". It is an

452:

see no problem in including your second point within it. Lastly, if 81, I believe his name is Anon, would please stop reverting all my edits on the page, I would appreciate it. If he objects to specific parts if he would just point them out and focus on that, that would be preferable. Thankyou.

195:

On the other hand, whatever your views are, it is extremely important in such a contentious article to at least get the BASIC FACTS right. These include geography (the borders are clearcut!), history (the history belongs in Israel/Palestine prior to 1949, since the West Bank has such artificial

3291:

Exactly, those who live here (the majority Palestinians) call it "falastin", while our cousins (as they are generally referred to in slang) call it "yehuda ve shomron". Why aren't both acknowledged? Also, you claimed redundancy as one reason for removing "occupied territories", did you see the

2535:

Some mention of terrorism should be given, whether a "milder" term should be used "up front" is nothing I have too strong opinions on, however, the article should do it best at reflecting the situation; while terrorisme is certainly part of it, not all forms of violence are terrorism, children

2357:

Palestinian resistance to Israel constitutes terrorism. The word "intifada" is not even present on this page. Also, there is not a single mention of violence or threat of violence by settlers. Given that, the introduction of the term "terrorism" seems quite out of place. How can one argue that

1473:

If someone objects to any term which is used for these areas in question it is almost comical that the first Objection is not made about the term "The West Bank" since this implies Jordanian ownership of the territory which no one advocates, including the Jordanians. From my horribly bias and

1903:

To a neutral reader, conquered doesnt imply that this was an illegal seizure. From my dictionary (merriam webster): "1 : to gain or acquire by force of arms : SUBJUGATE *conquer territory* 2 : to overcome by force of arms : VANQUISH *conquered the enemy* 3 : to gain mastery over or win by

1677:

Well, Palestine is ok to remove it, since until the PLO can regain sovereign of its territory, is not relevant. However, the Israeli West Bank barrier is not an important contribution to the page. It is a totally diferent article that only add controversy over the status of the territory. The

1141:

COMMENT: "Truth" is obviously not "in the eye of the beholder": it refers to what is and what has been. As I read your article, I saw absolutely no reference to the most important facts: namely, 1) that 800,000 Palestinians were expelled from their homeland in 1948; that 2) Israel has been in

4192:

no claim was made that the Romans were the first to use the term. However, the Philistine ("Plishtim" - stemming from the Hebrew word for invaders, since the Philistine were greek people who invaded this mostly semite region) lived in present day Gaza strip, while the Israelites lived in the

3389:

But this is all immaterial and starts to get very confusing. I don't think we should be citing all of this in the article. The problem with the article is that it is clearly written from a one-sided POV. Specifically, it is POV for what it omits, rather than what it includes, and it fails to

3229:

I do not intend to personally attack anybody, and I've been learning to be more and more patient since my first month on WP. However, I also take offense to this technique of "dehumanization" by describing patently false accusations that make certain people sound inhumane, and I will respond

1146:

Actually, truth is quite obviously in the eye of the beholder, since people can so rarely agree on what it is, yet all believe they have it. "What is and what has been" are facts, and even these are hotly disputed. The "facts" you refer to are very well referenced in many, many articles on

1079:

So it seems to me, that the West Bank is one (more precisely the last) part of the deceased entitity "Ottoman empire", whose dissolution is not yet completed. No existing country (as per UN definition) claims it to be an integral part of it, but a precursor to a possible future country (the

3582:

My only desire is to point out the hypocrisy of many of the posts regarding this issue. No one gave a damn about Palestinians till it involved Israel. And attempting to misinform about the land issue to support your cause is disingenuous and dishonest and i urge wikipedia to maintain their

3261:

Not true at all. Firstly, only recently I have started seeing Israeli maps that even show the green line; Hardly any Israeli map indicates the status of the West Bank. Secondly, the Knesset did not formally annex the Golan Heights and East Jerusalem, they only extended Israeli law to these

2453:

Or, it could be rephrased "maintenance of a military presence in the West Bank to reduce Palestinian attacks on Israeli civilians", which is less awkward and clearer. Similarly, "there was significant Palestinian refugee infiltration and attacks on Israeli civilians through the Green Line"

2637:

The point was, using the term without explicitly stating what is terrorism and what is not, one gives the impression that all resistance and violence is terror, which it isn't. And as Messhermit made clear, there are acts commited on the Israeli side too that could be labeled terrorism.

1343:

Unforunately, the International Community does not recognize that name. And that is something that must be clearly stated in the article. I don´t understand why did you deleted that. Also, rater than Imperialism, I stated once again Nationalistic claims, wich I find less offensive for any

3079:

I don't understand the question. How are the origins of Peace Now and Gush Shalom relevant? Ramallite's version is simply more accurate. (typo - be should be by) The other version suggests something false, that all Israeli supporters of 2 states consider the present conflict as solely

1381:, and I can't see any which actually add to the article. People recognize what the word annexation means, the maps are a fact, so is terrorism, and Israel's land has nothing to do with why an Arab state didn't materialize. I'm sorry, I just don't think the edits help the article at all. 712:

though Israel has no legal claim to the land. It would be funny if it wasn't so tragic to see the hypocrisy and self-serving mendacity of Zionists decrying the legitimacy of UN territorial dispute adjudication when it was the UN that created the modern state of Israel in the first place.

3129:

It is untrue as stated in the article that Israeli maps often show all Israeli-controlled territopry as "Israel"! I have never seen such a map anywhere. I remember being in Jerusalem after 1967 and seeing the signs, "come to Jordan and see Jerusalem". Those signs are long gone now.

646:

Alberuni has not cleared anything up; rather, he has just stated his highly POV opinion, mixed with the typically inflammatory rhetoric of anti-Israel activitists, who lace their screeds with Nazi terminology in a propagandistic attempt to equate Israel with Nazi Germany. In fact the

2718:

I concur with Messhermit here, but would prefer that we write in a manner where the narrative voice of the article does not accuse anyone of terrorism. It's inherently POV who is and is not a terrorist, so it should always be with a cited source as to who calls whom a "terrorist". --

2234:

in the West Bank (for reasons other than their non-Israelis spouses not being allowed to live in Israel?) As for mixed Jewish/Arab families, if you have sources, that would be nice too, as it would be informative (I know of some myself but I can't include it as it would be my own

2429:

Well, for example, "maintenance of a military presence in the West Bank to reduce Palestinian terrorism" could be rephrased as "maintenance of a military presence in the West Bank to reduce violent acts that the Israeli government and characterize as Palestinian terrorism". --

2007:

You can't set someone else's land free by taking it for yourself; did the armies of Genghis Khan "liberate" Croatia from its Hungarian overlords? And the examples given prove only that "conquer" is sometimes used nonneutrally, not that it has any necessary implication of it. -

1834:

since 1948, and the scope of the article should correspond to that. Jordanian occupation is highly relevant, especially because of the continuation of the use of Jordanian law in the West Bank after 1967, and the belated (1988) dropping of Jordan's claim on the territory. --

2444:

Actually, infiltration is the right words. Between 1952 and 1956, some 100,000 Palestinians moved into the West Bank from Jordan. Some of them were refugees from the previous war, some were people who moved there specifically to attack Israeli cities. (anon, 20 March 2005)

2160:

Then the wordings in the post-'48 map (below) should be equivalent for Israel/Jordan/Egypt. I don't care too much what verb, but labeling Israel as "seizing" or "capturing" land, while the land taken by Jordan and Egypt is merely "Arab land" is clearly inappropriate. --

1337:

In the 1st paragraph that appears "Judea and Samaria", I believe that the word "Anexation" is not the apropiated one, since fewer countries would not recognise this. That is the why I try to replaced it with the word "Nationalist", due to its biblical roots and Israeli

191:

I put in a lot of changes. While people seem to be paying lip service to NPOV, etc., what seems to be happening is that they are shuffling for territory so that they can give equal (if not more) space to their own opinions. How appropriate, given the subject matter.

96:

The very existence of this page under this title is in violation of the principles of "Neutral point of view". Only pro-Arab people generally refer to this area as "the West Bank". Pro-Israel terminology is "Judea and Samaria". How to handle this I can't recommend.

4110:

I also think it is a strange idea. From and Israeli standpoint, from and Arabic standpoint, and from a neutral standpoint it doesn't make sense. I could see why they would want to merge the article with Judea and Samaria but with Palestinian territories is silly.-

1866:

I'm not discussing the name of the Article (It's better to call it "West Bank"), What I'm saying is that if Jordanian Occupation is stated, at least the name "Judea and Samaria" should not be used for that. What is your oppinion about the map that I propose, Jmabel?

1601:

may consider your edits impartial, but I don't. I'm certainly willing to compromise, though, and I'd like this article to be better. Why don't you bring your proposed changes to this Talk: page, say a paragraph at a time, and we'll go through them and NPOV them.

4411:

Well, come to think of it, calling them "liberated territories" is somewhat archaic, I believe it was more prevalent among right-wing circles a couple of decades ago, closer to the time when they were "liberated", now they mostly call them Judea and Samaria. The

1874:

Assuming the map is accurate (it looks to me like it is) my only problem is with the word "seized", which in a mutual combat is rather POV. If that one word is changed to "incorporated", no problem. There may be other possibile words I'm not thinking of... --

3430:

There are hundreds of Internet sources that say the same thing we do -- that the UK and Pakistan were the only countries to recognize the Jordanian annexation of the West Bank (and that the UK excluded Jerusalem). I've not been able to find any discussion of

579:

IMHO the legal theory, why to use the term "occupied" is rather clear, and (AFAIK etc) the majority POV. But to let the reader learn more about other POVs, it should be pointed out under which legal theory, another status is claimed, and what this status is.

245:

No, it isn't really related ... or accurate either. The releases made upon reaching peace deals were by Israelis as part of the peace deals (or other arrangements). Arafat's supposed "revolving door policy" in prisons has nothing to do with peace deals with

3355:

As I understand it, then, there is a specific term for West Bank, though it's more rarely used? If you want to start that paragraph with the terms that Palestinians specifically use for the West Bank, then terms Israelis use, I think that would be great.

747:"If the shoe fits, wear it." I don't seem to have as much difficulty as some people editing objectively and avoiding the injection of my personal POV into Knowledge articles. Talk pages are the place to discuss the propagandistic biases of articles. 979:

Why don't you address the issue instead of categorically regurgitating Zionist propaganda as if it was fact? By the way, when did you stop claiming that "there is no such thing as a Palestinian?" Are you able to keep up with this confusing comment?

122:

Not everyone who is to your right is a "right-wing nationalist", though I am probably more sympathetic to Likud than you (though, as an American, I cannot vote for any Israeli party). I still think that "West Bank" cannot be termed a neutral term,

1199:

Oh, I see: this issue, like all others apparently, has "two sides," and these "sides" attract "partisans" like honey attracts bees. We never have to inconvenience ourselves with the question whether somebody is actually saying something that is

2395:. No idea if this was deliberate or accidental -- I'll presume the latter, I don't know this user. Clearly there was no consensus to remove it. I will restore. (I'll also have good look to see if other material was caught in the crossfire.) -- 1325:

Let me explain what did I mean with my modifications, wich are not vandalism (as somebody stated) but just an effort to create a more fair an balance article. Also, I stopped already to modify the page and try to reach a compromise in the TALK

3578:

Then there was the mistreatment of Palestinians during the 3 month marshall law period in Kuwait following the Iraqi withdrawal. But despite this, the world only seems to care when a Palestinian dies at the hand of a Jew. I find that curious.

1052:

controlled by Israel, but Israel has not annexed it. I wish things were simpler, and you could fit the West Bank into some other category, but this unique set of circumstances makes the West Bank a disputed territory under International Law.

586:

When doing (a very shallow) web search for sources, for example I stumbled about an argument that Israel is adminstrating these areas in place of the fallen Ottoman empire. If this is really claimed as a signifant POV, it should be mentioned.

2361:

Up until now, I literally have not written one word of this article. On the whole, I'd rather keep it that way; if someone else can address this, it would be appreciated. If not, I'm liable to attempt some edits along these lines myself. --

2771:

Jay, I don't have a lot of time right now, definitely not the time to really work out a concrete suggestion on this in the next few days. The word arises three times in the article. At least one raises a related issue that is suggestive:

3710:

Why people use different terms should be (and is to a significant extent) discussed at this article. We shouldn't have a different article for every alternate name of something, even when different names can reflect different points of

842:

I did sign my note and I left you an article to read. Sorry you missed it. Read more carefully next time. Here it is again. The reason why Israelis prefer "disputed" to "occupied" is well-known by anyone who has been following the issue

148:

This is not to say that I consider one side "right" and the other "wrong." Although both I and my church are pro-Israel, neither I nor my church are anti-Arab or anti-Islamic. I respect Islam (the religion) and esteem Islamic culture.

1701:

Since the article discusses occupation by Israel, it should link to previous occupations of the same territory. As for the barrier, I think it is related, and I think most would agree, but if you insist on removing it I won't object.

2238:). As for setter/local interactions, what you say may have been true before the intifadas, but apart from actual manual labor, there is probably very little interaction left. In fact, the route of the barrier is aimed to ensure that. 3997:

Merge, I think. Slim, what's lost with merge and redirect, as long as both names are discussed? This is, for example, exactly what we do with cities that have been known by different names, such as Bombay/Mumbai or Danzig/Gdansk. --

3118:

The reason for the retention of "West Bank" usage is among those designed to delitgitimize any Jewish reference to them. Also, the use of the term "Cisjordan" is a transparent ploy to avoid using the terms "Israel" or "Palestine".

3122:

Jordanian army invaded (or attempted to invade) Israel and were defeated. The presence of Israeli troops is due solely to the aggression by Jordan. Had this not happened, there would now be no Israeli presence in the "West Bank".

167:

Most people are familiar with the term "West Bank", since that's the term the Western media uses. Few people, other than Jews and Israelis, know what "Judaea and Samaria" means. "West Bank" is the ordinary term in English for this

635:

We should definitely mention the UN's point of view, along with other prominent parties who agree with it. After that, we have two choices: (A) mention other POV which disagrees with the UN; or (B) omit dissenting POV completely.

3682:

number because they are a minority among Jews in the real world; yet here they are over-represented and their egregious POV is actually accomodated at times! I think you do know what I mean, but I won't comment any more on this.

3922:

and I can see the same holds true here. viz. that there are distinct motivations for the use of both terms, and both are used by millions of people. I'm not sure I understand the argument in favor of merging. My reasoning with

1169:

think are so important to address. The issues you refer to are dealt with at length (not "alluded to") in the relevant articles, and by clicking on the copious links provided throughout this article you will easily find them.

291:

for a West Bank map that shows its borders. I'd like a map that shows the West Bank's border with Jordan, Syria, Lebanon & Israel proper -- plus any "natural geographic" boundaries such as rivers, lakes or mountain ranges.

4355:

I think reasons 2 and 3 fully justify your claim, but reason 1 is irrelevant. Foreign-language sources are generally acceptable, though of course when an equivalent English-language source is available it should be used. -

3108:

arguments from other equally biased people. So please, do not create controversy if it is useless to your argument, less this entire discussion reverts to counter-productive mud slinging- Khalid Constantine Al-Silverburg

1939:

You put more into conquer than what it is, a term which simply means "taken by force". Incorporated implies a peaceful nature to the process, which is outright wrong. And your interpretation of "liberate" assumes a POV.

4326:

3- Most importantly, the quoted source (to the best of my knowledge) does not clarify how the statistics were done or who their poll-taker was. The reason this is important is because the source refers to Palestinians

755:

and political beliefs of the editors who disagree with you. If you work in a collegial way on Knowledge, including the Talk: pages, I think you'll find it much easier to create NPOV on the articles of concern to you.

2334:

to use, perhaps "Held" or even "Occupied" instead. Also a Map, illustrating the Jordanian occupation of the west bank is just as relevent if not more so to the actual article.-Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg

2571:

argument to me; I don't know of anyone who is labelling "children throwing rock at police/military" as terrorism. However, I think shooting a pregnant woman and her four young daughters at close range would count.

1228:

Please, DO NOT try to justify the Israeli Government in every action that is involve. I consider this rather offending and clearly a violation of the main Purpuse of Knowledge: a NEUTRAL and IMPARCIAL Enciclopedia.

3412:.) As a West Banker, I rather think you are in an unmatched position to fix it here, and you have already proved your writing skills; I look forward to seeing the result! As to Jayjg: "liberated territories" is 2283:

It shows how the territory achieve his present state. I believe that is important to show how was the proposed idea of a Plestinian state before the war. The WEst Bank has not change its boundaries since that war.

3621:

Judea has its own article; so does Samaria. I don't see the requirement for a separate article on "Judea and Samaria" - the use of the joint term to describe the West Bank could as well be put under the West Bank

630:

A gradually shrinking remnant of advocates continue to protest the designation "occupied territory" on the grounds that Israel seized the area from Jordan, which (Israel claims) had no right to them in the first

262:

I actually meant the "cease fires" during the recent Intifada ("recently" = last 21 months). Of course, when Hammas guys are freed, a cease-fire turns into a situation when Israelis cease and Palestinians fire.

1331:

The only mayor modifications that I believe that are important is the way of how the article has been writed. As you can see, I diveded the 1st paragraph in smaller sections in order to make it easier to read

704:

ultimate legal status of the territories; in fact, it would be difficult to imagine a mechanism for this to happen. Ultimately borders are decided by legal treaties between sovereign nations, not by courts.

4234: 3344:. The fact that Palestinian media rarely single out the West Bank from Gaza is, itself, interesting. Ramallite, when Palestinian media need to refer to the West Bank in particular, what do they call it? -- 2406:

OK, it probably wasn't a bad faith edit. The article had been duplicated in a bizarre way, basically inserted in the middle of itself. It looks to me like Vacuum simply didn't figure that out properly.

1300:

One does not need to be NPOV on Talk: pages, but one does need to be so on article pages. Please do not confuse the two. I reviewed your edits, and felt they were indeed POV. Please bring your changes

4285:

Universities, but I don't think that it is right to say that the Universities are secular. 2. when people are acting violently, such as throwing rocks, it is no longer a domenstarion, but rather a riot.

1911:

Did the U.S. revolutionary forces "conquer" the United States in 1776? I did check my dictionary, and found that WordNet ® 2.0 dictionary (© 2003 Princeton University) had as a definition for "conquer"

1489:

Considering talk about West Bank is a tough task, personally i consider a better article can be done. i receintly have saw the changes on the article over throught the history and i think the version of

2983:

my opinion, by dividing this article in the "West Bank" (geographicaly talking) and its political status (in both cases, Jordanian and Israeli), the page can be clear of any POV or wrongfull statement.

905:

Ah, I see, you hightly indented one part of the comment, then spaced the other half all the way over to the left and placed it directly above other comments on the left. Very confusing for the reader.

385:

Sorry to put it in such blunt terms, but I think that without a clear definition of "Palestinian" the pages elian, uri and ed have been working on will never meet the Knowledge's standard of "neutral".

3729:

undecided, and while it's important to stress that the majority view is that it's currently called the West Bank, the significant-minority view shouldn't be absorbed into the other title, in my view.

3252:

maps with both the Golan Heights and Jerusalem inside Israel proper, this is probably to be expected though due to the Knesset formally annexing those areas, which both have a solid Jewish Majority.-

1444:

True enough, I'm sure, when writing in Hebrew. But in English? or any other language? Again, I asked about international use; outside of Israel, there is not a lot of non-liturgical use of Hebrew. --

3780:

It is a matter of official Israeli policy that "Judea and Samaria" and "the West Bank" denote the same piece of land. This was in the side-letters of the Camp David accords, afaik no changes since.

3656:, it says "this page is mostly for disambiguation", which is silly to have, because it's just about an alternate name. There is nothing that could be in that article that shouldn't be in this one.-- 1080:

Palestinian Authority) does. Israel does control the territory including its border control and does claim jurisdiction over all inhabitants, but grants citizen rights only to the jewish inhabitants.

777:

There is little point in discussing issues with a dishonest pro-Israeli propagandist. The reason why Israelis prefer "disputed" to "occupied" is well-known by anyone who has been following the issue

3413: 3605:

No, Jordan wasn't calling for a Palestinian state on the land it controlled, it was nearly in a civil war trying to prevent one: the Palestinian aspiration for such a state was already strong. --

699:

The legal status of them confusing and disputed, which is why "disputed" is the best term. There are a number of legal arguments essentially stating that Israel, under the 4th Geneva convertion,

171:

People on both sides of the fence use the term "West Bank" since (as RK points out) you'll find some pro-Israel people using it. No one on the pro-Arab side will use the term "Judaea and Samaria".

3574:

less Palestinians than in other Arab states the Palestinians have lived in. For instance, in Jordan in 1970 when 5000 - 10000 Palestinians were slaughtered. See the daily telegraph for citation

1147:

Knowledge; each article cannot be a recapitulation of the entire history of Zionism and Arab-Israeli conflict; rather, articles like this link to the relevant articles that discuss these issues.

2839:

properly? I mean, concentrating it only on the geography and non-political standars? the creation of a West Bank article under Israeli occupation can dela with the political problem, I believe.

3514:

Good stuff! It explains why I couldn't find anything actually documenting Pakistan's alleged recognition. I wonder now (surprise!) why this particular piece of common knowledge is out there. --

1920:

This obviously matches what happened more closely, since the 6 invading Arab armies were foreign. Of course I looked at the dictionary definition for "incorporate", and found this definition:

1268:

The article is not "my version", and I think your changes and deletions lack NPOV. Please bring your suggested changes here to be discussed first, and please focus on article content, not me.

2475:

The introduction of "Status" still has the word Terrorism, wich I believe that is not politically apropiate (at least not everything that is happening in the West Bank cannot be classified as

3045:"Settlements" is the world's (and Knowledge's) name for them, as Jayjg pointed out elsewhere. Besides, in what way are suicide bombers not human beings? But that's not the controversial part. 1254:

Excuse me, may I know why did you revert the article that I modify?. I´m completely trying to make the article a compromise betwen those two factions rather than just stating what I believe.

1060:

I would delete the reference to west bank as 'disputed' territory. If I could find 'some people' that said you were a communist bastard, would you put this up and claim impartiality? thanks

3177:

students are taught that the entire area between the River Jordan and the sea is theirs and that Jews have no rights at all. All Jews are to be killed and the country of Israel destroyed.

439:

If the Saudi proposal is mentioned at all (doubtful for this page as it belongs elsewhere) it is not ok to put arguments for or against it. Leumi's addition there is totally unacceptable.

329:

Thank you for responding so quickly (my version was up less than 2 hours). I will refrain from further edits until you have had a chance to see, comment on and fix any problems you see. --

3310:

as "falastin"? Or does that term encompass a rather larger area? As for the section below, it's obviously a POV relic of an earlier editor, which needs to be made more accurate as well.

988:

Other articles disagree with that article. So what? I don't think your categorically regurgitating Palestinian propaganda as if it was fact is any more helpful. Nor are non-sequiturs.

4248:

coined for the Judea province after the failed Jewish rebellion against the Roman Empire in 135 AD in order to eradicate all trace of Jewish existance and self governance in the region

2536:

throwing rock at police/military etc. The label terrorism should be used on terror, not on all forms of violance as it has then moved from a precise definition into a political view. --

4323:

2- According to the Hebrew source, these figures include both the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and since the Strip was a lot poorer than the West Bank, the statistics may be inaccurate.

4260:

The sources only show that Romans once ruled the area and persecuted Jews. They give no support at all for the contention that Jews object to the name "Palestine" for that reason.

3416:

to the point of approaching a neologism, while the mention of the normal Western terminology for the two areas belongs naturally after the discussion of how they got that way. -

2781:

maintenance of a military presence in the West Bank to reduce Palestinian terrorism by deterrence or by armed intervention, while relinquishing some degree of political control;…

4273: 4214:(1901-1906) for an unquestionably Jewish perspective from a time when the issue was not yet so fraught. You will notice that, while their version of the history up to that time 4264: 3020:

The international consensus is to call settlements just that: settlements. Even the Israeli government calls them that. "Towns" is a POV that they are not disputed - they are.

4392: 3750:

Naming issues aren't unique to this situation, but apply to practically every part of the world. For example, most Koreans call the body of water whose article we have at

322:

the uncritical use of "diputed territories" is a violation of NPOV, since it follows the Israeli policy to veil the fact of occupation. it is a purely Israeli euphemism. --

3217:

in place of a proper rebuttal. I know we are all amateur Historians but let us at least act rational intelligent adults and at least pretend not to have any prejudices.-

1994:

It was indeed "set free" from invading foreign armies. As for conquer, the example is given for a reason, which is the inherently non-neutral implication of the word.

4299: 3665:

I'm not sure what he means either, and he's said it more than once. Heraclius, what is an "unusual number of Kahanists", and how many are the on this encyclopedia?

3587:

egyptian officials as well. It is thorough and comprehensive. Best of luck to the Israeli's and Palestinians and may the withdrawal from Gaza spark a lasting peace.

4076: 231:

Hmm... this isn't really related, but the only way in which Palestinians have been known to celebrate peace deals recently, is by freeing Hamas guys from jail. --

3202:

is (at least for me) really controvertial. Unless he can prove with facts some of the things that he has stated, I don't believe those are accurate arguments. .

1986:

By contrast, its definition of conquer - "take possession of by force" - is an exact and neutral description; the specific examples it gives are not relevant. -

433:

That Israeli maps often include WB&G in "Israel" is a plain fact and I've even seen examples on Israeli government web sites. Its relevance is also obvious.

913:"Confusing"? Like the legal status of the Occupied Territories is "confusing and disputed" to you? It's always someone else's fault, isn't it? Try to keep up. 519:

I rewrote the intro a bit. It's a sensitive issue, so I'm sure something about it will be controversial. I've tried to equally offend both sides though. =]

4112: 3253: 3218: 3157:

The presence of Israeli troops is due solely to the aggression by Jordan. Had this not happened, there would now be no Israeli presence in the "West Bank".

396:

in Jordan may answer similarly. about 8 million people over the world will say this, too and add "I am Palestinian refugee". Is this answer clear enough? --

4441: 4295: 568: 3701:

I don't think it should be merged into this one. It's an article in its own right, and it explains why some people use those terms rather than West Bank.

1419:

strongly object to the terms Judea and Samaria, the use of which they deem to reflect Israeli expansionist aims," is a bit of an understatement. Is there

4270: 4144: 1129:. "Truth" is often in the eye of the beholder; what you view as the "truth" might not be viewed by others as the "truth"; Wipikedia strives to present a 627:, the West Bank is an "occupied territory" under international law. The Israeli Supreme Court began using the term "belligerent occupation" in June 2004. 174:"West Bank" is a neutral geographical term -- the West Bank of the Jordan river. "Judaea and Samaria" is suggestive of Jewish/Israeli claims to the area. 3616: 656: 408:

soon.) Ed, do you try to argue with other groups about who they should accept as members, such as Jews for example? The fact is that, today in 2003,

4198:

the phrase hebrew writing "Eretz Israel" to the English name "Palestine" on formal documents, including British mandate currency and postage stamps.

4133: 4093: 3256: 3059:

actually anti-Palestinian POV (they are all terrorists banter). Go to web sites such as www.peacenow.org or www.gush-shalom.org to see what I mean.

3695: 3160:

In other words, I have to be caged in by a racial segregation barrier because of what a former occupying power did to the current occupying power?

770:

Um, it's as if I hadn't said anything at all. I'll try again; please restrict comments to discussions of the article content. Thanks in advance.

583:

The term "disputed" doesn't clarify much, as it only implies, that there are more than one interpretations, but doesn't state the interpretations.

3686: 1064:

The preceding paragraph was anonymously interspersed 24 July 2005 (9 months after the remark it is addressing and the response that follows). --

4071: 2617:

against the Palestinians. If the word Terrorism is inevitable in the article, then it must be stated that in some occasions, both sides use it.

3626: 3242: 651:

are not "Occupied territories" under International law, particularly the 4th Geneva convention, and most particularly since the Oslo accords.

4461: 1887:

annexation and is a word generally not used in this context. I feel conquered is the most neutral term, but Im open for other suggestions. --

203:

Was that Danny? Anyway, thanks for pointing out my errors. I hope you can fix the article without reverting: the section on Arab and Israeli

3189: 2987: 1916:

To the neutral reader "conquer" has certain implications you appear unwilling to admit. I also looked up "liberate" and found that it means

1367:

As you can see, I have try to explain most of my modifications. I believe that a compromise can be reach in order to make a better article.

152:

I would like to see some sort of peaceful co-existence of Jews and Muslims in the Middle East. I do not have a formula to propose, however.

4115: 3266: 3206: 1491: 1404: 1368: 1287: 1255: 3168: 105:, which few people would describe as "pro-Arab", calls it the West Bank. I think this has to be considered the neutral term in English. -- 3483:

on the Jordanian action. Although it is subtitled "Only Great Britain and Pakistan recognized Jordan's annexation of the West Bank." in

4269:

Nineteen hundred years from the present, I wonder if the Greeks will object to the renaming of their land to "New-Turkey" or vice versa.

4103: 3715: 4364: 4226: 4185: 3660: 3647: 2939: 2246: 3556: 3531: 3521: 3509: 3398: 3362: 3331: 3300: 3262:

territories. Thirdly, there is no Jewish majority in these territories -- in both territories, only 45% of the population is Jewish.--

1455:

I think religious Jews and Christians often use the terms, whether or not they are supporters of alleged Israeli "expansionist aims".

296:, Friday, June 21, 2002 Is the West Bank of 2002 the same as the large pink area between Israel, the Jordan River and the Dead Sea in 4520: 4420: 4402: 3473: 3454: 2342: 3889: 3819: 3784: 3759: 3636: 1928:

which also seem neutral, but given the foreign invading army aspect I think we should probably go with the more neutral "liberate".

4347: 4310: 3671: 3341: 927:

Now you are disagreeing with yourself. "The legal status of them confusing and disputed, which is why "disputed" is the best term.

2776:

complete withdrawal from the West Bank in hopes of ending Arab attacks on Israel (sometimes called the "land for peace" position);

138:

legitimate claimants, and that Jewish residents of Palestine are "non-Palestinian" and hence illegitmate "occupiers" of the land.

4444: 4290: 928: 340:

term "Arab" or "Arab nationalist" for Palestinians, you already bowed to the Israeli position and don't write neutral anymore. --

141:

Without really neutral terminology, there is no way to discuss the situation without conceding points that must not be conceded.

3927:

was that it's a perjorative term and therefore shouldn't be given its own page, but that's not the case with Judea and Samaria.

3279:

The article is about the West Bank, and included in that is different names for it. It's not about names for other territories.

3221: 2264: 87: 2884:

That would be fine with me, but wherever it is, my issue about asymmetry in how we handle the doves and hawks still stands. --

2303:

article; it's not relevant here, since the "West Bank" did not exist until after the war was over and the armistice lines set.

2843: 535:. They should be noted, but not many people are going to be expecting this article under one of those names and surprised by 3599: 412:

including Ed knows immediately what is meant whenever someone says "the Palestinians". If you don't like it, get over it. --

4413: 920:

The legal status of the Disputed Territories is not at all confusing; they're clearly not Occupied under International Law.

4512:

Agree with Palmiro. This is like saying we shouldn't have an article on Texas because we have one on the United States. --

3148: 4480: 4381:, so you cannot claim the term is not in use. I assure you that it is sometimes used in Israel by extreme right-wingers.-- 4041:

Sorry, I didn't see this earlier. If I'm the only one to oppose a merge, then I won't try to stand in its way any longer.

1403:

By the way, a map of the Partition and how the territory evolved could be a interesting piece of information to the page.

4385: 4303: 4089:

of the "Palestinian territories" according to one interpretation. I think the West Bank warrants an article of its own.--

3137:

The reason for the retention of "West Bank" usage is among those designed to delitgitimize any Jewish reference to them.

2227: 4244:

On the other hand, many Israelis strongly object to the term "Palestine", as historicaly, this is the term that Emperor

4205: 1435:

These are the standard terms used in Hebrew; one need not support alleged Israeli "expansionist aims" to use the terms.

4471:

Re: Israeli right wing media sources - while the former and certainly the latter would qualify, the Jerusalem Post <

2098:

In this article, at least, they are. The plethora of articles on this topic renders more general comments difficult. -

619:

series of articles should note this special usage. Also, the point of view of the UN should be given prominence, like:

4507: 3881:, as I agree, and will post to that effect there shortly. As far as I can see, you're not naming a single fact from 3643:

The unusual number of Kahanists on this enyclopedia will definitely object. I don't recommend going through with it.

2392: 1207:

It's hard to imagine you could get people to agree on what is "true". Knowledge doesn't even try; instead, it has a

2288:

I don't see what the left panel adds; the right one, however, looks great for a history of the West Bank section. -

389:

I'm not going to revert any of your changes, Elian, since I value our working relationship more than the article. --

1914:

take possession of by force, as after an invasion; "the invaders seized the land and property of the inhabitants".

1597:

Well, I actually prefer if people don't mess with their Talk: comments, as it makes responses silly. Regardless,

2378:

article; in fact, it actually uses the phrase "terrorist group" as a descriptor itself. Am I missing something?

4171: 2506:

Not everything that is happening in the West Bank can be classified as terrorism, but certainly some of it can.

4428:

I took out the pesky word. Didn't mean to step on your toes, but I did check Israeli right wing media sources:

4152: 3442: 2235: 4085:. "Palestinian territories" refers to a political issue and West Bank refers to a geographical region that is 1979:"Liberate" would, according to your dictionary, assume that the area was "set free". It certainly was not. - 378:

an arbitrarily designated group invented by Arab leaders to delegitimize Israel and prevent the creation of a

4372: 3575: 3564: 3080:

characterized by Arab attacks on Israel, (excluding, say, their desire to end Israeli attacks on Arabs.) --

2337: 3420: 3231: 3032:

Isn't it enough that by far the most common term is Israeli (not Jewish, should be changed) settlements? --

2358:

discussion of "Palestinian terrorism" belongs on this page, but discussion of day-to-day violence does not?

1751:

I see no reason why Jordan's occupation should be "analyzed separately". What other map are you proposing?

297: 3487:, there is no mention of Pakistan or any other country but the UK recognizing the annexation in the debate. 1484: 2345:

for inconsistency for failing to pursue the issue of the use of the word "terrorism" in this article (per

1101:

of the Palestinian Authority, which is not quite a country, but which is definitely a form of government.

787:

Perhaps, but you might profit from discussing things with me. Regardless, you should sign your comments.

3583:

long-standing credibility and continue to present information based on citable and documented sourcing.

3316: 3285: 3112: 357:

a member of a Middle-eastern ethnic group plainly distinct from other ethnic groups in the region (like "

102: 4378: 156:

Perhaps if North and South Korea can reconcile, peace in the Middle East will seem more attainable. --

38: 1024:

guesses and you answer yes and no. It's becoming silly, not very good for such a topic. Nevertheless.

430:

Why do you remove the statement that "West Bank" excludes Gaza? The definition is wrong without that.

3915: 3870: 3837: 1125:

These topics are covered in a number of articles. The Argentina issue, for example, is mentioned in

4122:

This article and the one about the Gaza Strip should be merged with the Palestinian Territories one.

652: 4485: 4251: 3885:

that doesn't belong in this article. There is just no reasonable purpose given for two articles.--

2375: 2346: 1552: 79: 71: 66: 3632:

Which is why I've proposed that the two articles be merged here. Does anyone object to merging?--

3448:

I'm pretty sure User John Z has stated that it's not clear that Pakistan did so. I'll notify him.

1423:

international use of these terms other than by active supporters of Israeli expansionist aims? --

472:

I would just like to add the Hebrew terms in Hebrew script to this article: הגדה המערבית and יו״ש

4496: 2274:

What does that map have to do with the West Bank? That's a map about the 1948 Arab-Israeli war.

680:

isn't an answer at all, as it only claims that there a different views about the legal status. --

3844:. There are particular reasons for the use of the minority term, and the article explains them. 2609:

And shooting palestinian youngs playing soccer should count too. If Palestinians are exercising

3464: 1121:

that or just simply do not want to accept the fact. Sincerely, another frequent Knowledge user

486:

favour in no way impairs their status as facts which can safely be included in a NPOV article.

3340:

It certainly seems to me that we could use most of what Ramallite just wrote, here and/or at

2300: 1208: 616: 2624:

The article doesn't say which side is using it, so it's hard to see what your objection is.

1728:

arrange on the History of the territory. It is important to know how the territory evolved.

1546:), but talking about nowadays after world war two, this has become a main issue considering 187:

minority of pro-Israeli(mostly ultra-orthodax) people refer to it as, "Judaea and Samaria".

4454:

I don't feel strongly one way or another; I'm just gathering and presenting information. --

4045: 3931: 3848: 3733: 3705: 1494:

is impartial. I must say this territory has not nobody seemed to care about until our days.

3548:

Can't find a single item on Arabic Google about Pakistan recognizing Jordan's annexation.

8: 4344: 4210: 4168: 3596: 3553: 3395: 3328: 3297: 3239: 3186: 3165: 3145: 3099: 3064: 3050: 2243: 4499:. There is also space for individual coverage of the two areas of which it is composed. 4249: 4067:

Removing merge tag since no discussion on topic for 3 months and no consensus obtained.

303:

Yes, it is. But note that there's no "Israel" on the map. Those peace-loving Arabs... --

4458: 4399: 4320:

1- The source is in Hebrew, and there is no English language verification of this claim

3964: 3518: 3470: 3439: 3408:

Very true, and this pattern extends to most Knowledge articles on the topic (see also

101:

In Britain, this area is generally (in fact, almost always) called the West Bank. The

4504: 4279: 3882: 3808: 3653: 1211:

which says that all significant views are presented in a neutral and factual manner.

4517: 4361: 4261: 4223: 4182: 4138: 4100: 4003: 3610: 3425: 3349: 2889: 2793: 2724: 2435: 2400: 2367: 2350: 2257:

This is the map that I'm proposing, by the way. It is edited, so it stated a NPOV.

2166: 2072: 1880: 1840: 1449: 1428: 1069: 473: 163:

I think West Bank is a preferable term to "Judaea and Samaria", for three reasons:

1009: 480: 4204:

I don't know who wrote the preceding unsigned comment, you might want to look at

4042: 3928: 3845: 3730: 3702: 3692: 3669: 3501: 3452: 3360: 3314: 3283: 3203: 3074: 3027: 2984: 2937: 2840: 2766: 2712: 2677: 2628: 2618: 2576: 2510: 2484: 2458: 2411: 2382: 2307: 2278: 2258: 2131: 2026: 1998: 1974: 1932: 1898: 1868: 1805: 1778: 1755: 1729: 1706: 1679: 1660: 1641: 1606: 1583: 1572: 1557: 1459: 1439: 1385: 1309: 1272: 1245: 1230: 1215: 1191: 1174: 1152: 531:

down a bit, as they're not very commonly used in English, especially compared to

495: 487: 379: 145:

land for peace is one that must inevitably result in Israel losing all its land.

4476:

would not qualify according to either their own or the right-wing's definition.

4391:

Sure, but "sometimes used" isn't particularly useful. A more relevant search is

46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

4340: 4164: 3924: 3919: 3874: 3841: 3683: 3644: 3592: 3549: 3391: 3324: 3293: 3235: 3182: 3161: 3141: 3095: 3060: 3046: 2239: 1524: 1238: 1130: 624: 47: 17: 4253: 3230:

negatively to it regardless of whom it is directed against. I recently did so

1399:

Its History, and I guet that information from an American World History book.

561: 514: 4455: 4416:

includes this term. If you feel strongly about removing it, I won't object.--

4396: 3961: 3515: 3467: 3436: 3417: 3409: 3274: 2835:

Mmm... A simple sugestion: why don't we leave this article to talk about the

2322: 2289: 2201: 2099: 2044: 2009: 1987: 1980: 1539: 1518: 1186:

Partisans on both sides have complaints; it is clear which side you fall on.

997: 981: 976:

This article disagrees with your interpretations of international law Jayjg:

932: 914: 847: 781: 764: 748: 713: 604: 555: 543:

as an entity in 1949, with its western border defined by the cease-fire line.

507: 465: 445: 413: 3484: 1410: 763:

with you is far and away the worst part of my Knowledge experience to date.

4500: 4068: 3751: 3500:

Just did a bit of googling, couldn't find the old article but found this:

3460: 1506: 1086: 1044: 681: 637: 590: 390: 330: 293: 280: 208: 157: 106: 3576:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/04/28/wpal28.xml

1830:

I'm with Jayjg on at least one point here: the area has been known as the

1801:

annexed by Jordan, you can't wipe that out of the history of this region.

938:

It's not confusing to me, but to those who are unfamiliar with it, it is.

436:

I don't see any problem in mentioning that Jordan occupied the WB in 1948.

4513: 4477: 4357: 4219: 4178: 3999: 3886: 3816: 3781: 3756: 3712: 3657: 3633: 3623: 3606: 3528: 3506: 3345: 3081: 3033: 2885: 2789: 2720: 2431: 2396: 2388: 2374:

Oddly enough, I can't find "terrorism" among the "words to avoid" in the

2363: 2224: 2162: 2068: 2067:

and perhaps I have misunderstood the partition plan, I'm not expert.) --

1876: 1836: 1445: 1424: 1065: 405: 350: 304: 264: 232: 4495:

The territory is treated together (quite inadequately, I will admit) at

1305:

first to discuss them, rather than inserting them in the article first.

977: 4417: 4382: 4130: 4090: 3815:

article? If not, I can't see how separate articles can be justified.--

3666: 3480: 3449: 3357: 3311: 3280: 3263: 3071: 3024: 2934: 2763: 2674: 2639: 2625: 2573: 2537: 2507: 2455: 2423: 2408: 2379: 2304: 2275: 2128: 2023: 1995: 1971: 1941: 1929: 1905: 1895: 1888: 1802: 1752: 1703: 1657: 1603: 1569: 1512: 1456: 1436: 1382: 1306: 1269: 1242: 1212: 1187: 1170: 1148: 1134: 1102: 1053: 989: 939: 921: 907: 788: 771: 756: 741: 705: 658: 453: 423: 397: 341: 323: 316: 247: 220: 197: 3016:

Some of my edits were reverted. I believe they shouldn't be, because:

3011: 1564:

Most of what you are talking about is covered in other articles, like

1223: 574: 4429: 3812: 1619:

However, in the links sections, I believe that the following entries:

1565: 1543: 1535: 1241:

policy before attempting any major edits to this or other articles.

372: 275:

anything, it formed part of the Israeli border with Syria till 1967.

3836:

More or less what's there at the moment. I think it's analagous to

3463:

asserted this to have been the case on the floor of the UN in 1975

2568: 1500: 672:

Can you, at this point, please answer my original question: If not

180: 2252: 4245: 1918:

To set free, as from oppression, confinement, or foreign control.

1568:. The West Bank is a modern designation for a modern territory. 1126: 844: 778: 116: 3181:

the Israelis are doing most of the killing outside the schools.

996:

able to dictate to everyone else how these articles are edited?

4440:. They use the term "Disputed territories", or simply "Yesha". 611:

Thanks for clearing that up, Alberuni. If Israel uses the term

4437: 1319: 539:, which is pretty much the standard English name for the area. 1922:

To unite (one thing) with something else already in existence

1531: 676:, what is the legal status of these terroritories. Of course 4235:

Original research on why Jews object to the name "Palestine"

1476:

Dicussion moved to 'Merging "Judea and Samaria" here' below.

1031:

The Westbank is a no-mans-land (like Antarctica or the Moon)

349:

I guess this goes back to the question of terms: what is a "

2613:, then Hard-Line Jewish Settlers should also be accused of 1547: 422:

lacking in substance. Please do so before you revert them.

368: 358: 179:

really is no alternative that conveys the same meaning. --

89: 3435:

Pakistan did so (Britain was bound by treaty to do so.) --

1926:

To cause to merge or combine together into a united whole,

3292:

paragraph further down entitled "Political Terminology"?

931:

14:43, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)" I'll just leave you two alone.

4433: 3914:

I was persuaded there was a good reason for having both

1626:

Occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem by Jordan

288: 4472: 279:

Arab POV paragraph survived the last few revisions :-)

4377:

Cybbe, with a little more effort you would have found

2933:

Is there precedent for separating articles this way?

2200:

Well-spotted. "Seized" is definitely not neutral. -

2127:

Your understanding of the Partition Plan is correct.

1582:

reach a compromise in order to make a good article.

129:"Judea-Samaria" is a "right-wing nationalist" term. 4218:yours, it disagrees in quite a few particulars. -- 1542:

christian pilgrims were allowed to visit the city (

1040:The Westbank is still a part of the Ottoman Empire 2393:removed it with a totally misleading edit comment 2263: 1362:statement, and not something that I just invent. 655:paper from the Israeli government on the topic: 4147:, I want to clarify why I reverted your edits: 2479:). Can it be stated in another way? what about 1417:The Arab world and especially the Palestinians 1377:I've carefully gone through all of your edits 287:Thanks for the map, DanKeshet. I'm looking at 3652:I'm not sure what you mean. If you look at 1083:IANAL and YMMV, but what about this summary? 550:Clarified (hopefully) some wording and such. 506:. Your opinions are of no interest here. -- 371:residing in what the ancient Romans called 3502:Beyond the Veil: Israel-Pakistan Relations 2673:"war" should cover that, don't you think? 404:is a research topic I will write about on 4414:Hebrew article on Judea, Samaria and Gaza 3485:http://www.jcpa.org/art/knesset-index.htm 498:. Everyone knows that "voluntary" is an 3342:Definitions of Palestine and Palestinian 1113:== Comment by a frequent Knowledge user 2788:then there is no need in the other. -- 1534:got their territory, and so on let the 14: 4077:Merging "Palestinian territories" here 1356:form of Terrorism but is more neutral. 1237:Be that as it may, please examine the 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 3481:http://www.jcpa.org/art/knesset6.htm 25: 4331:the West Bank and not Palestinians 3811:article that doesn't belong in the 2711:stated that is used by both sides. 23: 4430:http://www.israelnationalnews.com/ 24: 4532: 3691:I actually won't care that much. 3306:Do the Palestinians refer to the 2349:), while objecting to its use at 1037:The Westbank is a part of Lebanon 364:a member of a distinct "race" (?) 3617:Merging "Judea and Samaria" here 3023:In what way are they not towns? 2762:What language would you prefer? 2265: 1034:The Westbank is a part of Israel 29: 4047:11:42, September 11, 2005 (UTC) 3070:What prompted these movements? 2343:Messhermit has taken me to task 134:to have a voluntary abortion. 4104:11:57, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 4094:10:38, 26 September 2005 (UTC) 4006:07:00, September 8, 2005 (UTC) 3966:01:24, September 8, 2005 (UTC) 3933:01:06, September 8, 2005 (UTC) 3850:00:25, September 8, 2005 (UTC) 3807:that you think should be in a 2043:Captured sounds fine to me. - 13: 1: 4521:19:26, 11 December 2005 (UTC) 4508:15:57, 10 December 2005 (UTC) 4481:02:59, 15 December 2005 (UTC) 4462:00:05, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 4445:00:10, 29 November 2005 (UTC) 4421:23:57, 28 November 2005 (UTC) 4403:23:40, 28 November 2005 (UTC) 4386:23:23, 28 November 2005 (UTC) 4365:06:06, 22 November 2005 (UTC) 4134:22:04, 11 February 2006 (UTC) 4072:03:13, 11 December 2005 (UTC) 3890:00:50, 8 September 2005 (UTC) 3820:23:42, 7 September 2005 (UTC) 3785:00:22, 1 September 2005 (UTC) 3707:02:37, August 24, 2005 (UTC) 3613:04:21, August 20, 2005 (UTC) 2481:Alarming increase of violence 2247:17:45, 17 November 2005 (UTC) 2228:17:29, 17 November 2005 (UTC) 615:in a special sense, than the 88:Is the very term "West Bank" 4348:15:14, 19 October 2005 (UTC) 4274:05:55, 9 December 2005 (UTC) 4265:11:17, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 4227:19:34, 16 October 2005 (UTC) 4186:04:51, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 4172:17:22, 12 October 2005 (UTC) 3960:Merge, per me and Pharos. 3735:23:40, August 31, 2005 (UTC) 2270:Map of the UN Particion Plan 2266:File:Partition-Armistice.PNG 7: 4438:http://www.voiceofjudea.com 4311:Education levels since 1967 4116:01:28, 8 October 2005 (UTC) 3869:Well, Tomer requested that 3760:23:53, 31 August 2005 (UTC) 3716:23:25, 31 August 2005 (UTC) 3696:02:46, 24 August 2005 (UTC) 3687:04:02, 19 August 2005 (UTC) 3672:03:32, 19 August 2005 (UTC) 3661:01:31, 19 August 2005 (UTC) 3648:01:05, 19 August 2005 (UTC) 3637:01:03, 19 August 2005 (UTC) 3627:00:49, 19 August 2005 (UTC) 3600:18:25, 18 August 2005 (UTC) 3267:15:47, 8 October 2005 (UTC) 3257:01:07, 8 October 2005 (UTC) 3243:01:50, 8 October 2005 (UTC) 3222:01:00, 8 October 2005 (UTC) 558:06:19, Jun 11, 2004 (UTC). 10: 4537: 3352:18:27, July 17, 2005 (UTC) 1908:17:35, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC) 1891:14:48, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC) 1883:05:59, Feb 26, 2005 (UTC) 1452:23:40, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC) 1431:19:36, Feb 10, 2005 (UTC) 1072:04:14, July 25, 2005 (UTC) 283:, Thursday, June 20, 2002 3916:Israeli West Bank barrier 3871:Israeli West Bank barrier 3838:Israeli West Bank barrier 3557:22:25, 27 July 2005 (UTC) 3532:21:18, 27 July 2005 (UTC) 3522:19:13, 26 July 2005 (UTC) 3510:14:25, 26 July 2005 (UTC) 3474:04:14, 25 July 2005 (UTC) 3455:03:25, 25 July 2005 (UTC) 3443:03:21, 25 July 2005 (UTC) 3421:22:41, 17 July 2005 (UTC) 3399:20:05, 17 July 2005 (UTC) 3363:03:08, 18 July 2005 (UTC) 3332:14:46, 17 July 2005 (UTC) 3317:07:01, 17 July 2005 (UTC) 3301:05:42, 17 July 2005 (UTC) 3286:05:35, 17 July 2005 (UTC) 3207:14:33, 13 July 2005 (UTC) 3190:11:42, 13 July 2005 (UTC) 3169:11:42, 13 July 2005 (UTC) 3149:11:42, 13 July 2005 (UTC) 2892:00:58, May 14, 2005 (UTC) 2796:06:04, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC) 2768:16:28, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC) 2727:06:48, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC) 2715:03:45, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC) 2642:18:56, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC) 2621:21:47, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC) 2540:21:00, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC) 2426:18:31, Mar 3, 2005 (UTC) 2403:22:29, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC) 2370:19:39, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC) 2299:It's appropriate for the 2280:06:34, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC) 2261:05:03, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC) 2169:23:48, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC) 2075:05:26, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC) 1990:04:33, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1983:04:31, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1976:18:49, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1944:18:36, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC) 1934:18:16, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1900:17:19, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1871:04:45, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1843:03:22, Feb 26, 2005 (UTC) 1629:Israeli West Bank barrier 1560:15:13, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1441:17:02, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1233:16:38, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1047:16:16, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC) 992:04:43, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC) 984:04:18, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC) 924:03:39, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC) 910:03:14, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC) 784:02:50, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC) 774:02:39, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC) 767:01:48, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC) 759:00:13, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC) 751:16:24, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC) 744:16:06, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC) 708:14:43, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC) 593:14:02, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC) 476:13:17, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC) 211:, Thursday, June 20, 2002 3076:3 July 2005 09:22 (UTC) 3067:3 July 2005 08:48 (UTC) 3029:3 July 2005 09:22 (UTC) 2988:17:22, 16 May 2005 (UTC) 2940:15:35, 16 May 2005 (UTC) 2844:00:54, 13 May 2005 (UTC) 2679:22:47, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC) 2630:22:48, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC) 2578:21:23, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC) 2512:17:11, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC) 2487:11:38, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC) 2438:18:39, Mar 3, 2005 (UTC) 2384:20:24, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC) 2376:Knowledge:Words to avoid 2347:Knowledge:Words to avoid 2325:05:09, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC) 2309:04:53, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC) 2292:04:37, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC) 2204:23:58, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC) 2133:15:14, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC) 2102:05:29, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC) 2047:05:00, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC) 2028:04:59, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC) 2000:04:51, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1807:20:28, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1781:17:48, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1757:17:35, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1732:17:05, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1708:03:39, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1682:19:27, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1662:17:09, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1644:16:38, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1608:17:09, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1586:16:38, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1574:19:36, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1553:Knowledge:Editing_policy 1461:03:42, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1194:04:09, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC) 1177:22:54, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC) 1155:21:29, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC) 1137:04:28, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC) 1105:19:13, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC) 1089:09:39, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC) 1056:00:13, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC) 1017:Talk:West Bank/Archive 1 1000:05:40, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC) 942:04:40, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC) 935:04:11, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC) 917:03:25, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC) 850:03:02, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC) 791:02:54, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC) 716:15:26, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC) 684:10:35, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC) 661:04:35, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC) 640:14:45, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC) 490:18:24, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC) 468:08:50, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC) 448:08:42, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC) 426:02:03, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC) 4497:Palestinian Territories 3466:for what it's worth. -- 3198:Mmmm... the opinion of 3102:3 July 2005 14:14 (UTC) 3084:3 July 2005 12:51 (UTC) 3053:3 July 2005 14:14 (UTC) 3036:3 July 2005 12:51 (UTC) 2460:18:46, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC) 2413:22:48, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1527:never cared about this, 1387:19:21, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1311:05:33, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1274:01:54, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1247:16:16, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC) 1217:18:35, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC) 607:20:34, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC) 510:05:50, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC) 456:21:12, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC) 416:08:42, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC) 4491:for the Palestinians. 2271: 2022:How about "captured"? 1551:keep this in mind the 1015:Thread continued from 571:, 18:29, Sep 12, 2004 4434:http://www.jpost.com/ 4099:I'm against it also. 3803:Look, Slim, is there 3565:WEST BANK Perspective 2301:Arab-Israeli conflict 2269: 1496:Some about history, 1209:Knowledge:NPOV policy 1131:neutral point of view 617:Arab-Israeli conflict 312:ha-Gadah ha-Ma'aravit 289:http://www.passia.org 42:of past discussions. 4473:http://www.jpost.com 4293:comment was added by 3755:roof, so to speak.-- 1485:For a Better article 1010:Legal theories (ctd) 674:occupied territories 649:Disputed territories 613:disputed territories 481:Palestinian Refugees 375:= "Palestinian Arab" 4211:Jewish Encyclopedia 3877:be merged, and you 2567:That sounds like a 2391:(who I don't know) 1538:at least after the 4379:74,800 Google hits 4193:mountanious areas. 2272: 562:Palestine / فلسطین 515:A bit of rewriting 207:is okay, I trust. 4346: 4307: 4170: 4153:Original research 4145:User:84.228.42.65 3883:Judea and Samaria 3809:Judea and Samaria 3654:Judea and Samaria 3598: 3555: 3527:head-scratcher.-- 3397: 3330: 3299: 3241: 3188: 3167: 3147: 3113:Judea and Samaria 3101: 3066: 3052: 2245: 2236:original research 1411:Judea and Samaria 623:According to the 547:of the West Bank. 525:Judea and Samaria 494:Same reply as in 85: 84: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 4528: 4486:Merging articles 4343: 4286: 4167: 4151:Please read the 4127:Disagree/against 3595: 3552: 3394: 3327: 3296: 3238: 3185: 3164: 3144: 3098: 3063: 3049: 2351:Alberto Fujimori 2267: 2242: 63: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 4536: 4535: 4531: 4530: 4529: 4527: 4526: 4525: 4488: 4375: 4313: 4282: 4237: 4141: 4079: 3619: 3567: 3428: 3308:West Bank alone 3277: 3115: 3014: 2340: 2255: 1487: 1413: 1322: 1226: 1027:Possible POVs: 1012: 577: 564: 517: 496:Talk:Gaza Strip 483: 380:Jewish homeland 94: 59: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 4534: 4524: 4523: 4510: 4487: 4484: 4469: 4468: 4467: 4466: 4465: 4464: 4426: 4425: 4424: 4423: 4406: 4405: 4374: 4371: 4370: 4369: 4368: 4367: 4338: 4337: 4324: 4321: 4312: 4309: 4306:) 16 Oct 2005. 4289:The preceding 4281: 4278: 4258: 4257: 4236: 4233: 4232: 4231: 4230: 4229: 4195: 4194: 4189: 4188: 4162: 4161: 4157: 4140: 4137: 4124: 4123: 4119: 4118: 4113:67.169.170.140 4107: 4106: 4078: 4075: 4065: 4064: 4063: 4062: 4061: 4060: 4059: 4058: 4057: 4056: 4055: 4054: 4053: 4052: 4051: 4050: 4049: 4048: 4022: 4021: 4020: 4019: 4018: 4017: 4016: 4015: 4014: 4013: 4012: 4011: 4010: 4009: 4008: 4007: 3980: 3979: 3978: 3977: 3976: 3975: 3974: 3973: 3972: 3971: 3970: 3969: 3968: 3967: 3945: 3944: 3943: 3942: 3941: 3940: 3939: 3938: 3937: 3936: 3935: 3934: 3925:Apartheid Wall 3920:Apartheid Wall 3901: 3900: 3899: 3898: 3897: 3896: 3895: 3894: 3893: 3892: 3875:Apartheid Wall 3858: 3857: 3856: 3855: 3854: 3853: 3852: 3851: 3842:Apartheid Wall 3827: 3826: 3825: 3824: 3823: 3822: 3796: 3795: 3794: 3793: 3792: 3791: 3790: 3789: 3788: 3787: 3769: 3768: 3767: 3766: 3765: 3764: 3763: 3762: 3741: 3740: 3739: 3738: 3737: 3736: 3721: 3720: 3719: 3718: 3679: 3678: 3677: 3676: 3675: 3674: 3640: 3639: 3618: 3615: 3603: 3602: 3566: 3563: 3562: 3561: 3560: 3559: 3543: 3542: 3541: 3540: 3539: 3538: 3537: 3536: 3535: 3534: 3493: 3492: 3491: 3490: 3489: 3488: 3427: 3424: 3406: 3405: 3404: 3403: 3402: 3401: 3382: 3381: 3380: 3379: 3378: 3377: 3368: 3367: 3366: 3365: 3353: 3335: 3334: 3304: 3303: 3276: 3273: 3272: 3271: 3270: 3269: 3254:67.169.170.140 3248: 3247: 3246: 3245: 3219:67.169.170.140 3214: 3213: 3210: 3209: 3195: 3194: 3193: 3192: 3174: 3173: 3172: 3171: 3154: 3153: 3152: 3151: 3114: 3111: 3110: 3109: 3104: 3103: 3094:running away! 3090: 3089: 3088: 3087: 3086: 3085: 3055: 3054: 3042: 3041: 3040: 3039: 3038: 3037: 3013: 3012:Recent Reverts 3010: 3009: 3008: 3007: 3006: 3005: 3004: 3003: 3002: 3001: 3000: 2999: 2998: 2997: 2996: 2995: 2994: 2993: 2992: 2991: 2990: 2961: 2960: 2959: 2958: 2957: 2956: 2955: 2954: 2953: 2952: 2951: 2950: 2949: 2948: 2947: 2946: 2945: 2944: 2943: 2942: 2912: 2911: 2910: 2909: 2908: 2907: 2906: 2905: 2904: 2903: 2902: 2901: 2900: 2899: 2898: 2897: 2896: 2895: 2894: 2893: 2863: 2862: 2861: 2860: 2859: 2858: 2857: 2856: 2855: 2854: 2853: 2852: 2851: 2850: 2849: 2848: 2847: 2846: 2816: 2815: 2814: 2813: 2812: 2811: 2810: 2809: 2808: 2807: 2806: 2805: 2804: 2803: 2802: 2801: 2800: 2799: 2798: 2797: 2785: 2784: 2783: 2778: 2743: 2742: 2741: 2740: 2739: 2738: 2737: 2736: 2735: 2734: 2733: 2732: 2731: 2730: 2729: 2728: 2695: 2694: 2693: 2692: 2691: 2690: 2689: 2688: 2687: 2686: 2685: 2684: 2683: 2682: 2681: 2680: 2656: 2655: 2654: 2653: 2652: 2651: 2650: 2649: 2648: 2647: 2646: 2645: 2644: 2643: 2635: 2634: 2633: 2632: 2631: 2592: 2591: 2590: 2589: 2588: 2587: 2586: 2585: 2584: 2583: 2582: 2581: 2580: 2579: 2552: 2551: 2550: 2549: 2548: 2547: 2546: 2545: 2544: 2543: 2542: 2541: 2522: 2521: 2520: 2519: 2518: 2517: 2516: 2515: 2514: 2513: 2495: 2494: 2493: 2492: 2491: 2490: 2489: 2488: 2466: 2465: 2464: 2463: 2462: 2461: 2442: 2441: 2440: 2439: 2419: 2418: 2417: 2416: 2415: 2414: 2339: 2336: 2331: 2330: 2329: 2328: 2327: 2326: 2313: 2312: 2311: 2310: 2294: 2293: 2254: 2251: 2250: 2249: 2220: 2219: 2218: 2217: 2216: 2215: 2214: 2213: 2212: 2211: 2210: 2209: 2208: 2207: 2206: 2205: 2183: 2182: 2181: 2180: 2179: 2178: 2177: 2176: 2175: 2174: 2173: 2172: 2171: 2170: 2145: 2144: 2143: 2142: 2141: 2140: 2139: 2138: 2137: 2136: 2135: 2134: 2114: 2113: 2112: 2111: 2110: 2109: 2108: 2107: 2106: 2105: 2104: 2103: 2085: 2084: 2083: 2082: 2081: 2080: 2079: 2078: 2077: 2076: 2055: 2054: 2053: 2052: 2051: 2050: 2049: 2048: 2034: 2033: 2032: 2031: 2030: 2029: 2015: 2014: 2013: 2012: 2002: 2001: 1968: 1967: 1966: 1965: 1964: 1963: 1962: 1961: 1960: 1959: 1958: 1957: 1956: 1955: 1954: 1953: 1952: 1951: 1950: 1949: 1948: 1947: 1946: 1945: 1855: 1854: 1853: 1852: 1851: 1850: 1849: 1848: 1847: 1846: 1845: 1844: 1817: 1816: 1815: 1814: 1813: 1812: 1811: 1810: 1809: 1808: 1789: 1788: 1787: 1786: 1785: 1784: 1783: 1782: 1767: 1766: 1765: 1764: 1763: 1762: 1761: 1760: 1759: 1758: 1740: 1739: 1738: 1737: 1736: 1735: 1734: 1733: 1718: 1717: 1716: 1715: 1714: 1713: 1712: 1711: 1710: 1709: 1690: 1689: 1688: 1687: 1686: 1685: 1684: 1683: 1668: 1667: 1666: 1665: 1664: 1663: 1648: 1647: 1646: 1645: 1634: 1633: 1630: 1627: 1623: 1622: 1621: 1620: 1614: 1613: 1612: 1611: 1610: 1609: 1590: 1589: 1588: 1587: 1576: 1575: 1556:contribution. 1529: 1528: 1525:British empire 1522: 1521:turks and even 1516: 1510: 1504: 1495: 1486: 1483: 1467: 1466: 1465: 1464: 1463: 1462: 1412: 1409: 1408: 1407: 1397: 1396: 1391: 1390: 1389: 1388: 1372: 1371: 1364: 1363: 1358: 1357: 1352: 1351: 1346: 1345: 1340: 1339: 1334: 1333: 1328: 1327: 1321: 1318: 1317: 1316: 1315: 1314: 1313: 1312: 1293: 1292: 1291: 1290: 1280: 1279: 1278: 1277: 1276: 1275: 1261: 1260: 1259: 1258: 1249: 1248: 1239:Knowledge:NPOV 1225: 1224:Modest Opinion 1222: 1221: 1220: 1219: 1218: 1202: 1201: 1196: 1195: 1179: 1178: 1164:this article. 1157: 1156: 1139: 1138: 1111: 1110: 1109: 1108: 1107: 1106: 1093: 1092: 1091: 1090: 1084: 1081: 1074: 1073: 1058: 1057: 1042: 1041: 1038: 1035: 1032: 1011: 1008: 1006: 1004: 1003: 1002: 1001: 974: 973: 972: 971: 970: 969: 968: 967: 966: 965: 964: 963: 962: 961: 960: 959: 958: 957: 956: 955: 954: 953: 952: 951: 950: 949: 948: 947: 946: 945: 944: 943: 936: 918: 876: 875: 874: 873: 872: 871: 870: 869: 868: 867: 866: 865: 864: 863: 862: 861: 860: 859: 858: 857: 856: 855: 854: 853: 852: 851: 815: 814: 813: 812: 811: 810: 809: 808: 807: 806: 805: 804: 803: 802: 801: 800: 799: 798: 797: 796: 795: 794: 793: 792: 726: 725: 724: 723: 722: 721: 720: 719: 718: 717: 690: 689: 688: 687: 686: 685: 665: 664: 663: 662: 633: 632: 628: 625:United Nations 609: 608: 596: 576: 575:Legal theories 573: 563: 560: 552: 551: 548: 544: 540: 516: 513: 512: 511: 482: 479: 478: 470: 461: 460: 459: 458: 457: 441: 440: 437: 434: 431: 419: 418: 417: 383: 382: 376: 365: 362: 347: 346: 345: 344: 334: 333: 320: 308: 307: 285: 272: 271: 270: 269: 268: 267: 255: 254: 253: 252: 251: 250: 238: 237: 236: 235: 226: 225: 224: 223: 213: 212: 189: 184: 176: 175: 172: 169: 161: 131: 120: 119: 111: 110: 93: 86: 83: 82: 77: 74: 69: 64: 52: 51: 34: 18:Talk:West Bank 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 4533: 4522: 4519: 4515: 4511: 4509: 4506: 4502: 4498: 4494: 4493: 4492: 4483: 4482: 4479: 4474: 4463: 4460: 4457: 4453: 4452: 4451: 4450: 4449: 4448: 4447: 4446: 4443: 4442:Rearden Metal 4439: 4435: 4431: 4422: 4419: 4415: 4410: 4409: 4408: 4407: 4404: 4401: 4398: 4394: 4390: 4389: 4388: 4387: 4384: 4380: 4366: 4363: 4359: 4354: 4353: 4352: 4351: 4350: 4349: 4345: 4342: 4334: 4330: 4325: 4322: 4319: 4318: 4317: 4308: 4305: 4301: 4297: 4296:83.130.67.163 4294: 4292: 4277: 4275: 4272: 4267: 4266: 4263: 4256: 4254: 4252: 4250: 4247: 4242: 4241: 4240: 4228: 4225: 4221: 4217: 4213: 4212: 4207: 4203: 4202: 4201: 4200: 4199: 4191: 4190: 4187: 4184: 4180: 4176: 4175: 4174: 4173: 4169: 4166: 4158: 4154: 4150: 4149: 4148: 4146: 4136: 4135: 4132: 4128: 4121: 4120: 4117: 4114: 4109: 4108: 4105: 4102: 4098: 4097: 4096: 4095: 4092: 4088: 4084: 4074: 4073: 4070: 4046: 4044: 4040: 4039: 4038: 4037: 4036: 4035: 4034: 4033: 4032: 4031: 4030: 4029: 4028: 4027: 4026: 4025: 4024: 4023: 4005: 4001: 3996: 3995: 3994: 3993: 3992: 3991: 3990: 3989: 3988: 3987: 3986: 3985: 3984: 3983: 3982: 3981: 3965: 3963: 3959: 3958: 3957: 3956: 3955: 3954: 3953: 3952: 3951: 3950: 3949: 3948: 3947: 3946: 3932: 3930: 3926: 3921: 3917: 3913: 3912: 3911: 3910: 3909: 3908: 3907: 3906: 3905: 3904: 3903: 3902: 3891: 3888: 3884: 3880: 3876: 3872: 3868: 3867: 3866: 3865: 3864: 3863: 3862: 3861: 3860: 3859: 3849: 3847: 3843: 3839: 3835: 3834: 3833: 3832: 3831: 3830: 3829: 3828: 3821: 3818: 3814: 3810: 3806: 3802: 3801: 3800: 3799: 3798: 3797: 3786: 3783: 3779: 3778: 3777: 3776: 3775: 3774: 3773: 3772: 3771: 3770: 3761: 3758: 3753: 3749: 3748: 3747: 3746: 3745: 3744: 3743: 3742: 3734: 3732: 3727: 3726: 3725: 3724: 3723: 3722: 3717: 3714: 3709: 3708: 3706: 3704: 3700: 3699: 3698: 3697: 3694: 3689: 3688: 3685: 3673: 3670: 3668: 3664: 3663: 3662: 3659: 3655: 3651: 3650: 3649: 3646: 3642: 3641: 3638: 3635: 3631: 3630: 3629: 3628: 3625: 3614: 3612: 3608: 3601: 3597: 3594: 3590: 3589: 3588: 3584: 3580: 3577: 3571: 3558: 3554: 3551: 3547: 3546: 3545: 3544: 3533: 3530: 3525: 3524: 3523: 3520: 3517: 3513: 3512: 3511: 3508: 3503: 3499: 3498: 3497: 3496: 3495: 3494: 3486: 3482: 3477: 3476: 3475: 3472: 3469: 3465: 3462: 3458: 3457: 3456: 3453: 3451: 3447: 3446: 3445: 3444: 3441: 3438: 3434: 3423: 3422: 3419: 3415: 3411: 3400: 3396: 3393: 3388: 3387: 3386: 3385: 3384: 3383: 3374: 3373: 3372: 3371: 3370: 3369: 3364: 3361: 3359: 3354: 3351: 3347: 3343: 3339: 3338: 3337: 3336: 3333: 3329: 3326: 3321: 3320: 3319: 3318: 3315: 3313: 3309: 3302: 3298: 3295: 3290: 3289: 3288: 3287: 3284: 3282: 3268: 3265: 3260: 3259: 3258: 3255: 3250: 3249: 3244: 3240: 3237: 3233: 3228: 3227: 3226: 3225: 3224: 3223: 3220: 3212: 3211: 3208: 3205: 3201: 3197: 3196: 3191: 3187: 3184: 3179: 3178: 3176: 3175: 3170: 3166: 3163: 3159: 3158: 3156: 3155: 3150: 3146: 3143: 3139: 3138: 3136: 3135: 3134: 3133:Emil Schafer 3131: 3127: 3123: 3119: 3106: 3105: 3100: 3097: 3092: 3091: 3083: 3078: 3077: 3075: 3073: 3069: 3068: 3065: 3062: 3057: 3056: 3051: 3048: 3044: 3043: 3035: 3031: 3030: 3028: 3026: 3022: 3021: 3019: 3018: 3017: 2989: 2986: 2981: 2980: 2979: 2978: 2977: 2976: 2975: 2974: 2973: 2972: 2971: 2970: 2969: 2968: 2967: 2966: 2965: 2964: 2963: 2962: 2941: 2938: 2936: 2932: 2931: 2930: 2929: 2928: 2927: 2926: 2925: 2924: 2923: 2922: 2921: 2920: 2919: 2918: 2917: 2916: 2915: 2914: 2913: 2891: 2887: 2883: 2882: 2881: 2880: 2879: 2878: 2877: 2876: 2875: 2874: 2873: 2872: 2871: 2870: 2869: 2868: 2867: 2866: 2865: 2864: 2845: 2842: 2838: 2834: 2833: 2832: 2831: 2830: 2829: 2828: 2827: 2826: 2825: 2824: 2823: 2822: 2821: 2820: 2819: 2818: 2817: 2795: 2791: 2786: 2782: 2779: 2777: 2774: 2773: 2770: 2769: 2767: 2765: 2761: 2760: 2759: 2758: 2757: 2756: 2755: 2754: 2753: 2752: 2751: 2750: 2749: 2748: 2747: 2746: 2745: 2744: 2726: 2722: 2717: 2716: 2714: 2709: 2708: 2707: 2706: 2705: 2704: 2703: 2702: 2701: 2700: 2699: 2698: 2697: 2696: 2678: 2676: 2672: 2671: 2670: 2669: 2668: 2667: 2666: 2665: 2664: 2663: 2662: 2661: 2660: 2659: 2658: 2657: 2641: 2636: 2629: 2627: 2623: 2622: 2620: 2616: 2612: 2608: 2607: 2606: 2605: 2604: 2603: 2602: 2601: 2600: 2599: 2598: 2597: 2596: 2595: 2594: 2593: 2577: 2575: 2570: 2566: 2565: 2564: 2563: 2562: 2561: 2560: 2559: 2558: 2557: 2556: 2555: 2554: 2553: 2539: 2534: 2533: 2532: 2531: 2530: 2529: 2528: 2527: 2526: 2525: 2524: 2523: 2511: 2509: 2505: 2504: 2503: 2502: 2501: 2500: 2499: 2498: 2497: 2496: 2486: 2482: 2478: 2474: 2473: 2472: 2471: 2470: 2469: 2468: 2467: 2459: 2457: 2452: 2451: 2450: 2449: 2448: 2447: 2446: 2437: 2433: 2428: 2427: 2425: 2421: 2420: 2412: 2410: 2405: 2404: 2402: 2398: 2394: 2390: 2386: 2385: 2383: 2381: 2377: 2373: 2372: 2371: 2369: 2365: 2359: 2356: 2352: 2348: 2344: 2335: 2324: 2319: 2318: 2317: 2316: 2315: 2314: 2308: 2306: 2302: 2298: 2297: 2296: 2295: 2291: 2287: 2286: 2285: 2281: 2279: 2277: 2268: 2262: 2260: 2248: 2244: 2241: 2237: 2232: 2231: 2230: 2229: 2226: 2203: 2199: 2198: 2197: 2196: 2195: 2194: 2193: 2192: 2191: 2190: 2189: 2188: 2187: 2186: 2185: 2184: 2168: 2164: 2159: 2158: 2157: 2156: 2155: 2154: 2153: 2152: 2151: 2150: 2149: 2148: 2147: 2146: 2132: 2130: 2126: 2125: 2124: 2123: 2122: 2121: 2120: 2119: 2118: 2117: 2116: 2115: 2101: 2097: 2096: 2095: 2094: 2093: 2092: 2091: 2090: 2089: 2088: 2087: 2086: 2074: 2070: 2065: 2064: 2063: 2062: 2061: 2060: 2059: 2058: 2057: 2056: 2046: 2042: 2041: 2040: 2039: 2038: 2037: 2036: 2035: 2027: 2025: 2021: 2020: 2019: 2018: 2017: 2016: 2011: 2006: 2005: 2004: 2003: 1999: 1997: 1993: 1992: 1991: 1989: 1984: 1982: 1977: 1975: 1973: 1943: 1938: 1937: 1936: 1935: 1933: 1931: 1927: 1923: 1919: 1915: 1910: 1909: 1907: 1902: 1901: 1899: 1897: 1893: 1892: 1890: 1885: 1884: 1882: 1878: 1873: 1872: 1870: 1865: 1864: 1863: 1862: 1861: 1860: 1859: 1858: 1857: 1856: 1842: 1838: 1833: 1829: 1828: 1827: 1826: 1825: 1824: 1823: 1822: 1821: 1820: 1819: 1818: 1806: 1804: 1799: 1798: 1797: 1796: 1795: 1794: 1793: 1792: 1791: 1790: 1780: 1775: 1774: 1773: 1772: 1771: 1770: 1769: 1768: 1756: 1754: 1750: 1749: 1748: 1747: 1746: 1745: 1744: 1743: 1742: 1741: 1731: 1726: 1725: 1724: 1723: 1722: 1721: 1720: 1719: 1707: 1705: 1700: 1699: 1698: 1697: 1696: 1695: 1694: 1693: 1692: 1691: 1681: 1676: 1675: 1674: 1673: 1672: 1671: 1670: 1669: 1661: 1659: 1654: 1653: 1652: 1651: 1650: 1649: 1643: 1638: 1637: 1636: 1635: 1631: 1628: 1625: 1624: 1618: 1617: 1616: 1615: 1607: 1605: 1600: 1596: 1595: 1594: 1593: 1592: 1591: 1585: 1580: 1579: 1578: 1577: 1573: 1571: 1567: 1563: 1562: 1561: 1559: 1554: 1549: 1545: 1541: 1540:third crusade 1537: 1533: 1526: 1523: 1520: 1517: 1514: 1511: 1508: 1505: 1502: 1499: 1498: 1497: 1493: 1482: 1478: 1477: 1471: 1460: 1458: 1454: 1453: 1451: 1447: 1443: 1442: 1440: 1438: 1434: 1433: 1432: 1430: 1426: 1422: 1418: 1415:Saying that " 1406: 1402: 1401: 1400: 1393: 1392: 1386: 1384: 1380: 1376: 1375: 1374: 1373: 1370: 1366: 1365: 1360: 1359: 1354: 1353: 1348: 1347: 1342: 1341: 1336: 1335: 1330: 1329: 1324: 1323: 1310: 1308: 1304: 1299: 1298: 1297: 1296: 1295: 1294: 1289: 1284: 1283: 1282: 1281: 1273: 1271: 1267: 1266: 1265: 1264: 1263: 1262: 1257: 1253: 1252: 1251: 1250: 1246: 1244: 1240: 1236: 1235: 1234: 1232: 1216: 1214: 1210: 1206: 1205: 1204: 1203: 1198: 1197: 1193: 1189: 1185: 1184: 1183: 1176: 1172: 1167: 1166: 1165: 1161: 1154: 1150: 1145: 1144: 1143: 1136: 1132: 1128: 1124: 1123: 1122: 1118: 1114: 1104: 1099: 1098: 1097: 1096: 1095: 1094: 1088: 1085: 1082: 1078: 1077: 1076: 1075: 1071: 1067: 1063: 1062: 1061: 1055: 1050: 1049: 1048: 1046: 1039: 1036: 1033: 1030: 1029: 1028: 1025: 1021: 1020: 1018: 1007: 999: 994: 993: 991: 987: 986: 985: 983: 978: 941: 937: 934: 930: 926: 925: 923: 919: 916: 912: 911: 909: 904: 903: 902: 901: 900: 899: 898: 897: 896: 895: 894: 893: 892: 891: 890: 889: 888: 887: 886: 885: 884: 883: 882: 881: 880: 879: 878: 877: 849: 845: 841: 840: 839: 838: 837: 836: 835: 834: 833: 832: 831: 830: 829: 828: 827: 826: 825: 824: 823: 822: 821: 820: 819: 818: 817: 816: 790: 786: 785: 783: 779: 776: 775: 773: 769: 768: 766: 761: 760: 758: 753: 752: 750: 746: 745: 743: 738: 737: 736: 735: 734: 733: 732: 731: 730: 729: 728: 727: 715: 710: 709: 707: 702: 698: 697: 696: 695: 694: 693: 692: 691: 683: 679: 675: 671: 670: 669: 668: 667: 666: 660: 657: 653: 650: 645: 644: 643: 642: 641: 639: 629: 626: 622: 621: 620: 618: 614: 606: 601: 600: 599: 594: 592: 588: 584: 581: 572: 570: 569:129.241.139.9 559: 557: 549: 545: 541: 538: 534: 530: 526: 522: 521: 520: 509: 505: 501: 497: 493: 492: 491: 489: 477: 475: 469: 467: 455: 450: 449: 447: 443: 442: 438: 435: 432: 429: 428: 427: 425: 415: 411: 407: 402: 401: 400: 399: 393: 392: 387: 381: 377: 374: 370: 366: 363: 360: 356: 355: 354: 352: 343: 338: 337: 336: 335: 332: 328: 327: 326: 325: 319: 318: 313: 306: 302: 301: 300: 298: 295: 290: 284: 282: 276: 266: 261: 260: 259: 258: 257: 256: 249: 244: 243: 242: 241: 240: 239: 234: 230: 229: 228: 227: 222: 217: 216: 215: 214: 210: 206: 202: 201: 200: 199: 193: 188: 183: 182: 173: 170: 166: 165: 164: 160: 159: 153: 150: 146: 142: 139: 135: 130: 128: 127: 118: 113: 112: 108: 104: 100: 99: 98: 91: 81: 78: 75: 73: 70: 68: 65: 62: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 4489: 4470: 4427: 4376: 4339: 4332: 4328: 4314: 4288: 4283: 4271:216.58.9.243 4268: 4259: 4243: 4238: 4215: 4209: 4206:this article 4196: 4163: 4142: 4126: 4125: 4086: 4082: 4080: 4066: 3878: 3804: 3752:Sea of Japan 3690: 3680: 3620: 3604: 3585: 3581: 3572: 3568: 3461:Chaim Herzog 3432: 3429: 3407: 3307: 3305: 3278: 3215: 3200:Emil Schafer 3199: 3132: 3128: 3124: 3120: 3116: 3015: 2836: 2780: 2775: 2614: 2610: 2480: 2476: 2443: 2360: 2354: 2341: 2332: 2282: 2273: 2256: 2253:Proposed map 2221: 1985: 1978: 1969: 1925: 1921: 1917: 1913: 1831: 1598: 1530: 1488: 1479: 1475: 1472: 1468: 1420: 1416: 1414: 1398: 1378: 1302: 1227: 1180: 1162: 1158: 1140: 1119: 1115: 1112: 1059: 1043: 1026: 1022: 1016: 1014: 1013: 1005: 975: 700: 677: 673: 648: 634: 612: 610: 595: 589: 585: 582: 578: 565: 553: 536: 532: 528: 524: 518: 503: 499: 484: 471: 462: 420: 409: 394: 388: 384: 348: 321: 311: 309: 286: 277: 273: 204: 194: 190: 185: 177: 162: 154: 151: 147: 143: 140: 136: 132: 125: 124: 121: 109:, 2002 Jan 5 95: 60: 43: 37: 4373:"Liberated" 4262:Brian Tvedt 4101:Brian Tvedt 3414:non-notable 2389:User:Vacuum 2387:Looks like 2338:"Terrorism" 567:israeli. — 474:Hippietrail 406:Palestinian 351:Palestinian 36:This is an 4216:intersects 4043:SlimVirgin 3929:SlimVirgin 3846:SlimVirgin 3731:SlimVirgin 3703:SlimVirgin 3693:Guy Montag 3204:Messhermit 2985:Messhermit 2841:Messhermit 2713:Messhermit 2619:Messhermit 2485:Messhermit 2259:Messhermit 1869:Messhermit 1779:Messhermit 1730:Messhermit 1680:Messhermit 1642:Messhermit 1584:Messhermit 1558:HappyApple 1513:Byzantines 1492:messhermit 1405:Messhermit 1369:Messhermit 1320:Compromise 1288:Messhermit 1256:Messhermit 1231:Messhermit 502:and not a 488:LoveOfFate 4341:Ramallite 4280:Education 4239:Deleted: 4208:from the 4165:Ramallite 3813:West Bank 3684:Heraclius 3645:Heraclius 3593:Ramallite 3550:Ramallite 3392:Ramallite 3325:Ramallite 3294:Ramallite 3236:Ramallite 3183:Ramallite 3162:Ramallite 3142:Ramallite 3096:Ramallite 3061:Ramallite 3047:Ramallite 2837:West Bank 2615:terrorism 2611:Terrorism 2477:Terrorism 2240:Ramallite 1832:West Bank 1656:section? 1632:Palestine 1566:Palestine 1544:Jerusalem 1536:crusaders 537:West Bank 533:West Bank 529:Cisjordan 373:Palestine 80:Archive 5 72:Archive 3 67:Archive 2 61:Archive 1 4456:jpgordon 4397:jpgordon 4393:this one 4304:contribs 4291:unsigned 4139:Highways 3805:anything 3622:article. 3516:jpgordon 3468:jpgordon 3437:jpgordon 3426:Pakistan 3418:Mustafaa 3140:Source? 2569:strawman 2323:Mustafaa 2290:Mustafaa 2202:Mustafaa 2100:Mustafaa 2045:Mustafaa 2010:Mustafaa 1988:Mustafaa 1981:Mustafaa 1501:Persians 1344:Israeli. 1326:article. 1160:is one. 1133:instead. 998:Alberuni 982:Alberuni 933:Alberuni 915:Alberuni 848:Alberuni 782:Alberuni 765:Alberuni 749:Alberuni 714:Alberuni 678:disputed 638:Uncle Ed 605:Alberuni 556:Delirium 410:everyone 4501:Palmiro 4246:Hadrian 4083:against 4069:Doright 3711:view.-- 3459:Hokay. 1519:Ottoman 1127:Zionism 1087:Pjacobi 1045:Pjacobi 682:Pjacobi 591:Pjacobi 500:opinion 391:Ed Poor 331:Ed Poor 294:Ed Poor 281:Ed Poor 246:Israel. 209:Ed Poor 158:Ed Poor 126:even if 107:Zundark 39:archive 4514:Jmabel 4478:Tewfik 4358:Jmabel 4220:Jmabel 4179:Jmabel 4000:Jmabel 3887:Pharos 3879:agreed 3817:Pharos 3782:John Z 3757:Pharos 3713:Pharos 3667:Jayjg 3658:Pharos 3634:Pharos 3624:Dooley 3607:Jmabel 3591:okay. 3529:John Z 3507:John Z 3450:Jayjg 3410:WP:CSB 3358:Jayjg 3346:Jmabel 3312:Jayjg 3281:Jayjg 3082:John Z 3072:Jayjg 3034:John Z 3025:Jayjg 2935:Jayjg 2886:Jmabel 2790:Jmabel 2764:Jayjg 2721:Jmabel 2675:Jayjg 2626:Jayjg 2574:Jayjg 2508:Jayjg 2456:Jayjg 2432:Jmabel 2409:Jayjg 2397:Jmabel 2380:Jayjg 2364:Jmabel 2305:Jayjg 2276:Jayjg 2225:Tewfik 2163:Jmabel 2129:Jayjg 2069:Jmabel 2024:Jayjg 1996:Jayjg 1972:Jayjg 1930:Jayjg 1896:Jayjg 1877:Jmabel 1837:Jmabel 1803:Jayjg 1753:Jayjg 1704:Jayjg 1658:Jayjg 1604:Jayjg 1570:Jayjg 1507:Romans 1457:Jayjg 1446:Jmabel 1437:Jayjg 1425:Jmabel 1383:Jayjg 1350:vague. 1338:pride. 1307:Jayjg 1270:Jayjg 1243:Jayjg 1213:Jayjg 1188:Jayjg 1171:Jayjg 1149:Jayjg 1066:Jmabel 701:cannot 631:place. 523:Moved 305:Uriyan 265:Uriyan 233:Uriyan 168:place. 4475:: --> 4418:Doron 4383:Doron 4131:Shuki 4091:Doron 3962:Tomer 3275:Terms 3264:Doron 2640:Cybbe 2538:Cybbe 2424:Cybbe 1942:Cybbe 1906:Cybbe 1889:Cybbe 1532:Arabs 1379:again 1200:true. 1135:Jayjg 1103:Jayjg 1054:Jayjg 990:Jayjg 940:Jayjg 929:Jayjg 922:Jayjg 908:Jayjg 789:Jayjg 772:Jayjg 757:Jayjg 742:Jayjg 706:Jayjg 659:Jayjg 454:Leumi 424:Leumi 398:Elian 342:Elian 324:Elian 317:Danny 248:Danny 221:Danny 205:views 198:Danny 16:< 4518:Talk 4505:Talk 4459:∇∆∇∆ 4400:∇∆∇∆ 4362:Talk 4333:from 4300:talk 4276:MO. 4224:Talk 4183:Talk 4087:part 4081:I'm 4004:Talk 3918:and 3873:and 3840:and 3611:Talk 3519:∇∆∇∆ 3471:∇∆∇∆ 3440:∇∆∇∆ 3350:Talk 3232:here 2890:Talk 2794:Talk 2725:Talk 2436:Talk 2401:Talk 2368:Talk 2167:Talk 2073:Talk 1924:and 1881:Talk 1841:Talk 1548:jews 1450:Talk 1429:Talk 1303:here 1192:Talk 1175:Talk 1153:Talk 1070:Talk 527:and 508:Zero 504:fact 466:Zero 446:Zero 414:Zero 369:Arab 367:any 359:Kurd 353:"? 4436:, 4143:To 3433:why 2355:all 1599:you 1421:any 1332:it. 181:SJK 103:CIA 90:POV 4516:| 4503:| 4432:, 4360:| 4329:in 4302:• 4222:| 4181:| 4002:| 3609:| 3348:| 2888:| 2792:| 2723:| 2638:-- 2483:? 2434:| 2399:| 2366:| 2165:| 2071:| 1940:-- 1879:| 1839:| 1448:| 1427:| 1190:| 1173:| 1151:| 1068:| 846:. 780:. 636:-- 554:-- 444:-- 361:") 299:? 263:-- 117:RK 76:→ 4298:( 4287:— 4255:. 1515:, 1509:, 1503:, 1019:. 92:? 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index