اجعلنا صفحة البداية RSS خدمة Add to favorite Facebook Twitter

Advanced

Al-Walaja behind the lens: Storytelling through images
Published Thursday 12/07/2012 (updated) 13/04/2013 20:00
(MaanImages/Charlie Hoyle)

DAR AL-KALIMA, Bethlehem (Ma'an) -- Children from the village of al-Walaja on Wednesday exhibited a series of photos in Bethlehem which document social, political and cultural issues that affect their everyday lives.

The project entitled "I am Al-Walaja" is the continuation of an arts advocacy initiative started by Alison Ramer in 2011.

"The project teaches children how to tell stories and advocate for human rights. It stimulates the creative process," Ramer told Ma'an.

"It also aims to encourage children to pursue higher education in the arts."

Ten students from the village worked with photographer Ahed Izhiman to tell the story of the changing fortunes of a village severely impacted by the Israeli occupation.

In 1948, al-Walaja was the second largest land area after Jerusalem, but was cut down to one third the size when Israel declared statehood that year.

Today, the 2,500-strong community face severe restrictions on land use due to Israel's separation wall, which once completed, will completely encircle the village.

(MaanImages/Charlie Hoyle)

The village is also nearly entirely surrounded by Har Gilo and Gilo settlements.

The photography exhibition is part of an advocacy project entitled "Images and Identity", which teaches young Palestinians how to use images to articulate history, identity and space.

It first showcased in Nabi Saleh, when young villagers spent a summer learning how to use photography as a tool of storytelling.

(MaanImages/Charlie Hoyle)

In 2012, "Image and Identity" became a project of Grassroots Jerusalem, an urban and human rights organization focused on East Jerusalem, and one of their local partners, the Ansar Center in al-Walaja.

In August, the project will move to the flashpoint Jerusalem neighborhood of Silwan, where photographers will work with local youngsters to create 'I am Silwan.'

"Art is about advocacy," Ramer says, "and this project is about providing children with a creative opportunity to do that."











(MaanImages/Charlie Hoyle)
Print Send to friend
1 ) Brian Cohen / Israel
12/07/2012 23:35
Telling a story? More like learning how to tell fables. "Surrounded" by Har Gilo? Har Gilo is on the top of a mountain. It surrounds nothing. Gilo? Gilo is on the north side of Walaja, far across the wadi. To the east? Bethlehem. To the West? Batir. To the South? Al Khadr. Surrounded? Only by Palestinian propaganda.

2 ) Michael / Israel
13/07/2012 09:11
Brian, You're invited to take a tour of Al-Walajeh and see for yourself. Although Gilo is across the wadi and Har Gilo "only" on top of the mountain, Israel is building a wall all around Al-Walajeh, closing it from all directions and would leave only one route connecting it to the rest of the West Bank. I suggest you don't talk of propaganda before you see it with your own eyes.

3 ) Brian Cohen / Israel
13/07/2012 22:53
I drive through Walajeh every workday, Mikey. Walajeh is paying the price for the Palestinian policy of terrorism (what they call "resistance to the occupation"). And no, it will not close it "from all directions" since Walajeh remains totally open on its Bethlehem side. I suspect that you are the one who has never been there, Michael. Go see for yourself and stop repeating Palestinian propaganda. They can easily get rid of the wall by stopping attacks. They don't.

4 ) Jihane / Palestine/France
14/07/2012 00:57
@ 3 BS ! Everybody knows the Wall has nothing to do with any attack whatsoever ! It's only an excuse to steal more Palestinian land. If not, the Wall would be on the Green Line, and not full of holes where you can pass, even with a bomb if that's what you want. Isn't that great, just as Israelis are squatting Palestinian land, they are squatting Ma'an too ! We don't wan't their f..... propaganda here ! They have the MSM in the rest of the world.

5 ) Gaia / Planet Earth
14/07/2012 01:19
Brian, do you seriously believe the wall is there for security ?! That's a joke. Thousands of Palestinians cross the wall weekly to work in Israel, legally and illegally and they haven't hurt anybody. The illegal settlements and the wall are there for colonisation and pilliging the Holy Land taking the land and overexploiting water resources from the Palestinians. That's why the settlements are on hilltops. Stop believing Zionism. You are digging your own grave.The revenge of Gaia will big.

6 ) Brian Cohen / Israel
14/07/2012 12:46
Sorry, folks, but the truth is hard for you to accept. The facts speak for themselves. Before the security fence there were hundreds of terrorist attacks by Palestinians who killed and wounded thousands of innocent people. After the fence the number of bombings was reduced to almost zero, including snipers in Walaja/Beit Jala shooting civilians. It is no excuse. It is only the truth. You choose not to like the truth, but that's your problem. It's no joke and we're not laughing. The fence works.

7 ) bobz / palestine
14/07/2012 14:15
brian, the reason theres no "terrorist" attack, is because the PA took all the weapons for freedom fighters, not the apartheid wall, which took all water sources and more lands so you and your colonizing friends can swim in big swimming pools and plant your stolen colonies...

8 ) Brian Cohen / Israel
14/07/2012 22:58
Bobz. The numbers are the facts. Fence goes up, suicide and car bombings go to near zero. Adding, of course, that several attempts to smuggle bombers through the checkpoints into Israel failed, except for one that killed an innocent British woman in Jerusalem - and no, she's no martyr. She was murdered by your freedom fighters. Want the fence to come down? 1) Abbas and Haniyeh declare that bombers are not "heroes" 2) Return to the peace talks. The fence works. It stays till you change.

9 ) ian / australia
15/07/2012 02:59
#6 "The fence works." I'm sure it does Brian. It's a huge success. The gift that keeps on giving. And I'm also sure that every aspect of its impact is cynically calculated and intended. It's why it's there. Security is the "cover" and "reduced violence" the justification, while it carries out its real purpose: menacing and demoralising villages like al-Walajeh, keeping Palestinians angry, traumatised, wreckless and best of all...violent, blurring legal borders to make the conflict appear

10 ) ian / australia
15/07/2012 03:02
(contd.) impossibly "difficult" and "complex"...while absorbing Palestinian land and resources into illegal constructs like greater Jerusalem! So, a brilliant success all round! Problem is, nobody is fooled and the ICJ and every other relevant body has ruled it illegal, which makes for a state of affairs that is clearly not sustainable and will ultimately fail.

11 ) ian / australia
15/07/2012 11:48
(contd.) impossibly "difficult" and "complex"...while absorbing Palestinian land and resources into illegal constructs like greater Jerusalem! So, a brilliant success all round! Problem is, nobody is fooled and the ICJ and every other relevant body has ruled it illegal, which makes for a state of affairs that is clearly not sustainable and will ultimately fail.

12 ) ian / australia
15/07/2012 15:51
#8 More fence. "The numbers are the facts. Fence goes up, suicide and car bombings go to near zero." Even if that was true, the "fence" is still illegal coz it's on occupied Palestinian land (GCIV etc.) If it was really just for "security" it would follow the '67 line and few would have a problem with it and the violence would end. The trespassing into the West Bank and the colonising of stolen land is what CREATES the "need" for security in the first place. A circular, cynical ploy.

13 ) ian / australia
15/07/2012 15:55
(contd.) "The fence works. It stays till you change." More of the same big lie. Brian, do you really think anyone is buying that? That Bibi "no-Palestinian-state-on-my-watch" Netanyahu would tear down the wall in a gesture of good will if only the Palestinian side would declare the shuhada criminals and agree to meet with him for more endless, pointless talks? No, I didn't think so.

14 ) Brian Cohen / Israel
17/07/2012 20:48
Ian, isn't Australia illegally occupied by you white settlers who invaded and stole an entire continent?

15 ) ian / australia
18/07/2012 10:18
#14 In a word Brian, no. Australia is not "illegally occupied". We are one big happy family here. Everyone is a citizen. Everyone votes. Everyone is equal under the law and has the same rights! It's nice. You should try it. But seriously, my small contribution to the issue of borders is this: the legitimacy of Israel on the '67 line is the same as the legitimacy of Australia within its border. It's based on the fact that the rest of the world has accepted it...regardless of the not particularly

16 ) ian / australia
18/07/2012 10:20
(contd.) moral way both our countries were founded. The West Bank, however (inc. East Jerusalem, Haram, HaKotel etc.) is different and the consensus is that Israel has NO valid claim to any of it. So, IMHO, you have a right to your home (which I'm assuming is NOT in the West Bank), I have a right to mine and our Palestinian brothers and sisters have a right to theirs. Shalom.

17 ) Brian Cohen / Israel
18/07/2012 14:43
The "consensus" is that Palestinians will have an apartheid state in which Jews are banned and have no rights. We object to your claim, as does international law, which calls the areas "disputed territories" whose status must be resolved by a peace treaty between the warring parties. The Palestinians will be full citizens in their own state. We Israelis agree to that, but they refuse to negotiate. That the world screwed the aborigines. That's nothing to be proud of.

18 ) Brian Cohen / Israel
18/07/2012 19:29
Funny, Ian, but many Aborigines don't agree with you about their homeland not being occupied by millions of thieving settlers who stole a continent.

19 ) ian / australia
19/07/2012 15:24
#17 "The "consensus" is that Palestinians will have an apartheid state in which Jews are banned and have no rights." Nonsense Brian! There is no such "consensus". (Change "consensus" to "spin" and you have a point.) Some Palestinian leaders have said extreme things and others have said Jews are welcome to stay as citizens. There is also every indication that a Palestinian state would be modern and democratic. Besides, it's a fatuous argument: why would Jews even be there if they are "banned"...

20 ) ian / australia
19/07/2012 15:24
(contd.) or want to live there if they "have no rights"...and with the "Jewish state" next door?

21 ) ian / australia
19/07/2012 15:26
#17 '…international law…calls the areas "disputed territories" ' Bollocks Brian! The language of the ICJ decision and UNRES 242 is very clear: the territories are occupied making the Fourth Geneva Convention (signed by Israel) the relevant protocol. Of course, the "disputed not occupied" argument is always raised but it's based on nothing...pulled out of thin air, like all those other mischievous Likud "debating points" your posts are generally full of!

22 ) ian / australia
19/07/2012 15:27
#17 "We Israelis agree...but they refuse to negotiate." Coz Israel has NEVER made a serious, in good faith offer of territory for a viable state and the latest from Bibi that Palestinians can forget about the "Temple Mount" ever being part of it confirms that he never intends to!

23 ) ian / australia
19/07/2012 15:36
#18 "...many Aborigines don't agree with you about their homeland not being occupied by millions of thieving settlers who stole a continent." Really Brian, realistically, what more can be done in the 21st Century to make up for crimes committed in the 18th (or in Israel's case, continues to commit) than extend citizenship and rights to the descendants of the victims? (Also, your tacit admission that Israel, like a lot of places, was founded by "thieving settlers" is duly noted.) Again..peace!

24 ) Brian Cohen / Israel
19/07/2012 19:58
And despite your propaganda, Ian, it is well known that Israel made substantial offers in good faith of territory for a viable Palestinian state. If you say that 3 centuries are enough to erase the "crimes" of the past, then you're telling us that all Israel has to do is wait until the 23rd century and give Arabs citizenship. By your theory, we'll have complete legal entitlement to the entire country. Ok. I like your theory. We'll wait until then. Let's call it the Ian-Aussie precedent.

25 ) ian / australia
21/07/2012 16:21
#24 "...it is well known that Israel made substantial offers in good faith of territory for a viable Palestinian state." Well you can't mean Camp David and the state of unconnected "islands" (aka "holes" in the Swiss cheese) Arafat rejected and I doubt you're referring to the Partition Plan (accepted by Israel) which was at least a 50/50 split (almost) and would, I'm sure, be accepted if re-offered today so I'm not sure which "substantial offers" for a "viable Palestinian state"

26 ) ian / australia
21/07/2012 16:22
(contd.) you're talking about but it clearly wasn't viable enough or the Palestinians would have accepted.

27 ) ian / australia
21/07/2012 16:27
#24 "If you say that 3 centuries are enough...all Israel has to do is wait until the 23rd century...etc. etc." Yes, very clever Brian but I didn't really imply a timetable did I? And I would have thought it pretty obvious the time to start obeying the law is now. "By your theory, we'll have complete legal entitlement to the entire country." Well not really given how out-numbered you're going to be in three hundred years and all those new Arab citizens come to vote! I'd do a deal ASAP!

28 ) ian / australia
21/07/2012 16:58
#24 "If you say that 3 centuries are enough...all Israel has to do is wait until the 23rd century...etc. etc." Yes, very clever Brian but I didn't really imply a timetable did I? And I would have thought it pretty obvious the time to start obeying the law is now. "By your theory, we'll have complete legal entitlement to the entire country." Well not really given how out-numbered you're going to be in three hundred years and all those new Arab citizens come to vote! I'd do a deal ASAP!

29 ) ian / australia
22/07/2012 23:57
#24 "If you say that 3 centuries are enough to erase the "crimes" of the past..." Didn't say that Brian. The passing of time in itself doesn't "erase" anything. "The crimes of the past" remain crimes and especially when they're still being committed. However, learning from the past, making changes and generally behaving better, goes a long way in making up for them.

30 ) Brian Cohen / Israel
24/07/2012 00:59
Darn it, Ian. You just like making up rules to justify your own occupation of Australia, don't you? We happen to like obeying the law - which is why polls show that Arabs in Israel do NOT want to live in Palestine. We want a 2-state solution, but Abbas refuses to negotiate. The bottom line is that Abbas refuses. We all know he couldn't and wouldn't sign a treaty anyway. So we keep pretending he wants peace, even though he knows he doesn't. He just won't admit it publicly.

31 ) Brian Cohen / Israel
24/07/2012 01:02
And Ian, if you say the time to start obeying the law is now, shouldn't you be packing your bags to go back to Britain where you came from? I have to admit it certainly is convenient for you that 300 years later when the Aborigines are just a tiny minority in their own country that you sound so generous. We have come back to our native land, Ian. That land is Israel and that happens to be where we come from. Tell the Palestinians to negotiate.

32 ) Brian Cohen / Israel
24/07/2012 23:30
So #29 - if the illegal occupation of Australia remains a crime, and the settlers are still occupying Australia, then what are you telling us? Your message is clear - occupation and settlement worked of Australia. Worked for America too. However, it didn't work in Palestine because the Jewish refugees came back to claim their homeland. You said it, Ian. Time doesn't erase the crime. Jews come from Palestine. This is our homeland.

33 ) ian / australia
26/07/2012 23:36
#30 "Darn it, Ian. You just like making up rules..." Not my rules Brian, international law. "We happen to like obeying the law..." Not international law or UN resolutions. "...Arabs in Israel do NOT want to live in Palestine." Doesn't follow from the claim about "obeying the law" in any way I can see and also doesn't mean anything. Where people want to live is their business. If they are settled with a good life why move? Where Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza want to live is more

34 ) ian / australia
26/07/2012 23:36
(contd.) the issue. "We want a 2-state solution, but Abbas refuses to negotiate." But you say he can forget about the Haram al-Sharif and a capital in EJ and the '67 borders and the big settlements and the RoR etc. etc. so you're not really serious about 2 states and only make offers that are sure to be rejected. So Pres. Abbas is hardly the one "pretending he wants peace, even though he knows he doesn't (and) won't admit it publicly."

35 ) ian / australia
26/07/2012 23:37
#31 "...if you say the time to start obeying the law is now, shouldn't you be packing your bags to go back to Britain where you came from?" Firstly, no law requires me to, so your argument doesn't work. And secondly, as an Australian citizen (a recognised legal status) I'm no more able to "go back" to England than you are...less for all I know. "I have to admit it certainly is convenient for you that 300 years later when the Aborigines are just a tiny minority in their own country that you sound

36 ) ian / australia
26/07/2012 23:38
(contd.) so generous." Convenient? If you say so, but that's just how it is. Generous? Not really, just decent and law abiding. "We have come back to our native land...that happens to be where we come from". Highly debatable Brian, certainly unprovable but mainly irrelevant as nothing like that is covered by law. Modern law and rights safeguard many things...but not the reclaiming of ancient lands by self-proclaimed heirs and esp. not when someone else has lived there for centuries!

37 ) ian / australia
26/07/2012 23:39
(contd.) "Tell the Palestinians to negotiate." Don't think they'd listen to me Brian and frankly don't see why they should bother...not with Bibi at the table! Shalom.
Name Country
Comment
Characters
Note: Comments will be reviewed for appropriate content. Click here for more details.

Share/Bookmark

War photographers share insight in new work
Israel calls off UNESCO mission to Jerusalem
Palestinian, Lebanese journalists tour Jordan

Close Next Previous
All Rights Reserved © Ma'an News Agency 2005 - 2013