Posts
Welcome to 9-11 Movies
-
The idea behind this site is to present the most rudimentary, simplified,
common-sense information about the anomalies that fuel our doubts about the
offic...
Showing posts with label israeli apartide. Show all posts
Showing posts with label israeli apartide. Show all posts
Friday, November 23, 2012
Sunday, September 30, 2012
UK helps Israeli human rights abuses
PressTV
London is allowing British security giant G4S help the Israeli regime in its violation of the Geneva Conventions on the rights of the victims of war despite the government’s obligation to protect those rights.
According to corporate accountability campaigners, G4S has a contract with the Israeli Prison Authority to provide services to several Israeli detention facilities, including those keeping Palestinian prisoners transferred from the West Bank, British Labour MP Lisa Nandy wrote in an article for the New Statesman.
Nandy said the British government has confirmed that Tel Aviv’s policy of detaining Palestinian prisoners violates Article 76 of the Fourth Geneva Convention.
The regime’s military courts have imprisoned an estimated 730,000 Palestinian men, women and children since 1967.
Many of the inmates have been moved to the Palestinians’ Occupied Territories in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention while Tel Aviv has also breached article 37 of the convention by restricting children in conditions that leave them without family contacts.
Meanwhile, the Israeli Prison Service has acknowledged to holding at least 285 Palestinians in administrative detention without charge or trail.
This comes as G4S continues to operate in Israeli detention centers, including in Ofer Prison, where the company’s services are linked with military trial of Palestinian prisoners.
While the Geneva Conventions do not apply to companies, they do apply to governments and the British government can simply intervene in G4S’s services in the Israeli regime’s prisons but it refuses to do so.
G4S has promised to end its contracts in Israeli prisons but has not announced a deadline.
The British government seems as unwilling to end G4S’s contracts with Tel Aviv.
Nandy quoted Foreign Office Minister Alistair Burt as saying "provision of services in [the Occupied Territories] is a matter for G4S" and not for the British government.
Monday, September 3, 2012
Netanyahu: Zionism succeeded because of Christian support
WhyIsrael
By Ryan Jones.. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday stated that Zionism and the rebirth of the Jewish state would not have succeeded without the backing and support of Christian Zionism.
Netanyahu was speaking at a rededication ceremony for the landmark windmill situated at the entrance to Mishkenot Sha’ananim, the first neighborhood built outside Jerusalem’s Old City walls.
Built in 1858 by Jewish philanthropist Moses Montefiore, the windmill quickly became a recognized symbol of Jerusalem. But over the years, it fell into disrepair.
The windmill’s restoration was made possible by the cooperation of various government bodies and private charities, but the bulk of the funding has come from the Dutch organization Christians for Israel.
Last month, Dutch experts oversaw the installation of a new dome and blades on the iconic structure, and managed to return the windmill to working order.
Acknowledging the role played by Christians for Israel in this particular project, and the involvement in general of Christian Zionists in Israel’s restoration, Netanyahu said:
“I don’t believe that the Jewish State and Modern Zionism would have been possible without Christian Zionism. I think that the many Christian supporters of the rebirth of the Jewish State and the ingathering of the Jewish people in the 19th century made possible the rise of…modern Jewish Zionism. We always had the deeply ingrained desire to come back to our land and rebuild it. …That was made possible in the 19th century, by the resurgence of Christian Zionism… It’s well represented here today by our Dutch friends.”
Netanyahu was speaking at a rededication ceremony for the landmark windmill situated at the entrance to Mishkenot Sha’ananim, the first neighborhood built outside Jerusalem’s Old City walls.
Built in 1858 by Jewish philanthropist Moses Montefiore, the windmill quickly became a recognized symbol of Jerusalem. But over the years, it fell into disrepair.
The windmill’s restoration was made possible by the cooperation of various government bodies and private charities, but the bulk of the funding has come from the Dutch organization Christians for Israel.
Last month, Dutch experts oversaw the installation of a new dome and blades on the iconic structure, and managed to return the windmill to working order.
Acknowledging the role played by Christians for Israel in this particular project, and the involvement in general of Christian Zionists in Israel’s restoration, Netanyahu said:
“I don’t believe that the Jewish State and Modern Zionism would have been possible without Christian Zionism. I think that the many Christian supporters of the rebirth of the Jewish State and the ingathering of the Jewish people in the 19th century made possible the rise of…modern Jewish Zionism. We always had the deeply ingrained desire to come back to our land and rebuild it. …That was made possible in the 19th century, by the resurgence of Christian Zionism… It’s well represented here today by our Dutch friends.”
Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Rachel Corrie, U.S. activist killed by Israel bulldozer, brought it "upon herself," court says
CBS News
An Israeli court ruled Tuesday that the military was not at fault for killing a U.S. activist crushed by an army bulldozer during a 2003 demonstration, rejecting a lawsuit filed by her parents.
The bulldozer driver has said he didn't see 23-year-old Rachel Corrie, a pro-Palestinian activist, who was trying to block the vehicle's path during a demonstration in the Gaza Strip against the military's demolition of Palestinian homes.
The military deemed her March 2003 death an accident, but Corrie's parents said the driver acted recklessly and filed a civil lawsuit two years later.
Explaining the district court's ruling, Judge Oded Gershon said Corrie "put herself in a dangerous situation" and called her death "the result of an accident she brought upon herself." He said the military conducted a proper investigation and rejected the Corrie family's request for a symbolic $1 in damages and legal expenses.
Corrie's family, who flew in from the U.S. for the verdict, lamented the court's ruling. Their lawyer, Hussein Abu Hussein, said he would appeal the ruling to Israel's Supreme Court.
"We are of course, deeply saddened and deeply troubled by what we heard today," said her mother, Cindy Corrie of Olympia, Washington. "I believe this was a bad day. Not only for our family but for human rights, the rule of law, and also for the country of Israel."
Corrie's sister, Sarah, held up a picture of her sister lying lifeless in bulldozer tracks. The family's lawyer, Hussein Abu Hussein pointed at it: "How did the bulldozer not see her?" he asked. To say that the driver did not see her "is lies to the living and also lies to the dead."
The home demolitions were part of an unsuccessful campaign to halt thousands of attacks on soldiers and Jewish settlers in southern Gaza, along the border with Egypt, in the preceding 3 ½ years. On the day Rachel Corrie died, she and other activists had entered a closed military zone to protest the demolition policy.
According to the U.N. agency handling Palestinian refugees, the military had left more than 17,000 Gazans homeless in the four years after a Palestinian uprising against Israel erupted in September 2000. The demolitions drew international condemnation at the time.
In her death, Corrie became the embodiment of what Palestinian activists say is Israel's harsh repression of nonviolent protest to occupation. Israel says by entering conflict zones to try to interfere with military activities, activists recklessly choose to risk their lives.
Her parents have relentlessly pursued her case since going to court in 2005 after a military investigation cleared the driver.
They say they have spent $200,000 to fly in witnesses, attend 15 hearings and translate more than 2,000 pages of court transcripts.
At the news conference, Cindy Corrie read a passage from one of her daughter's letters, biting her lip as her husband, grim-faced, held a microphone for her.
"Life is very difficult. Human beings can be kind, brave and strong, even in the most difficult of circumstances," Rachel Corrie wrote. "Thank you for existing, for showing how good people can be, despite great hardship."
The Corrie case was the first civil lawsuit of a foreigner harmed by Israel's military to conclude in a full civilian trial. Others have resulted in out-of-court settlements.
An Israeli court ruled Tuesday that the military was not at fault for killing a U.S. activist crushed by an army bulldozer during a 2003 demonstration, rejecting a lawsuit filed by her parents.
The bulldozer driver has said he didn't see 23-year-old Rachel Corrie, a pro-Palestinian activist, who was trying to block the vehicle's path during a demonstration in the Gaza Strip against the military's demolition of Palestinian homes.
The military deemed her March 2003 death an accident, but Corrie's parents said the driver acted recklessly and filed a civil lawsuit two years later.
Explaining the district court's ruling, Judge Oded Gershon said Corrie "put herself in a dangerous situation" and called her death "the result of an accident she brought upon herself." He said the military conducted a proper investigation and rejected the Corrie family's request for a symbolic $1 in damages and legal expenses.
Corrie's family, who flew in from the U.S. for the verdict, lamented the court's ruling. Their lawyer, Hussein Abu Hussein, said he would appeal the ruling to Israel's Supreme Court.
"We are of course, deeply saddened and deeply troubled by what we heard today," said her mother, Cindy Corrie of Olympia, Washington. "I believe this was a bad day. Not only for our family but for human rights, the rule of law, and also for the country of Israel."
Corrie's sister, Sarah, held up a picture of her sister lying lifeless in bulldozer tracks. The family's lawyer, Hussein Abu Hussein pointed at it: "How did the bulldozer not see her?" he asked. To say that the driver did not see her "is lies to the living and also lies to the dead."
The home demolitions were part of an unsuccessful campaign to halt thousands of attacks on soldiers and Jewish settlers in southern Gaza, along the border with Egypt, in the preceding 3 ½ years. On the day Rachel Corrie died, she and other activists had entered a closed military zone to protest the demolition policy.
According to the U.N. agency handling Palestinian refugees, the military had left more than 17,000 Gazans homeless in the four years after a Palestinian uprising against Israel erupted in September 2000. The demolitions drew international condemnation at the time.
In her death, Corrie became the embodiment of what Palestinian activists say is Israel's harsh repression of nonviolent protest to occupation. Israel says by entering conflict zones to try to interfere with military activities, activists recklessly choose to risk their lives.
Her parents have relentlessly pursued her case since going to court in 2005 after a military investigation cleared the driver.
They say they have spent $200,000 to fly in witnesses, attend 15 hearings and translate more than 2,000 pages of court transcripts.
At the news conference, Cindy Corrie read a passage from one of her daughter's letters, biting her lip as her husband, grim-faced, held a microphone for her.
"Life is very difficult. Human beings can be kind, brave and strong, even in the most difficult of circumstances," Rachel Corrie wrote. "Thank you for existing, for showing how good people can be, despite great hardship."
The Corrie case was the first civil lawsuit of a foreigner harmed by Israel's military to conclude in a full civilian trial. Others have resulted in out-of-court settlements.
Rachel Corrie's parents describe ruling as 'bad day for human rights' - video
Guardian
Cindy and Craig, the parents of Rachel Corrie, who was killed by an Israeli military bulldozer in 2003, say the judge's ruling that Israel wasn't responsible for her death has 'deeply saddened and deeply troubled' the family. Cindy Corrie told a press conference it was a bad day for human rights, humanity and the law
Cindy and Craig, the parents of Rachel Corrie, who was killed by an Israeli military bulldozer in 2003, say the judge's ruling that Israel wasn't responsible for her death has 'deeply saddened and deeply troubled' the family. Cindy Corrie told a press conference it was a bad day for human rights, humanity and the law
Thursday, August 23, 2012
Palestinian Hunger Strikes: Why Still Invisible?
Richard Falk
When it is realized that Mahatma Gandhi shook the British Empire with a series of hunger strikes, none lasting more than 21 days, it is shameful that Palestinian hunger strikers ever since last December continue to exhibit their extreme courage by refusing food for periods ranging between 40 and over 90 days, and yet these exploits are unreported by the media and generally ignored by relevant international institutions. The latest Palestinians who have aroused emergency concerns among Palestinians, because their hunger strikes have brought them to death’s door, are Hassan Safadi and Samer Al-Barq. Both had ended long earlier strikes because they were promised releases under an Egyptian brokered deal that was announced on May 14, 2012, and not consistently implemented by israel. Three respected human rights organizations that have a long and honorable record of investigating Israeli prison conditions have issued a statement in the last several days expressing their ‘grave concern’ about the medical condition of these two men and their ‘utmost outrage’ at the treatment that they have been receiving from the Israeli Prison Service.
For instance, Hassan Safadi, now on the 59th day of a second hunger strike, having previously ended a 71 day fast after the release agreement was signed, is reported by Addameer and Physicians for Human Rights-Israel, to be suffering from kidney problems, extreme weakness, severe weight loss, headaches, dizziness, and has difficulty standing. It is well established in medical circles that there exists a serious and risk of cardio-vascular failure for a hunger strike that lasts beyond 45 days.
In addition to the physical strains of a prolonged hunger strike, the Israeli Prison Service puts deliberately aggravates the situation facing these hunger strikers in ways that have been aptly described as cruel and degrading punishment. Such language is generally qualifies as the accepted international definition of torture. For instance, hunger strikers are punitively placed in solitary confinement or put coercively in the presence of other prisoners or guards not on hunger strikes so as to be taunted by those enjoying food. It is also an added element of strain that these individuals were given false hopes of release, and then had these expectations dashed without even the disclosure of reasons. Both of these strikers have been and are being held under administrative detention procedures that involve secret evidence and the absence of criminal charges. The scrupulous Israel human rights organization, B’Tselem, has written that the use of administrative detention is a violation of international humanitarian law unless limited to truly exceptional cases, which has not been the case as attested even in the Israeli press. Hassn Safaedi’s experience with administrative detention exhibits the manner of its deployment by Israeli occupation authorities. Administrative detention was initially relied upon to arrest him when he was a child of 16, and since then he has served a variety of prison terms without charges or trial, and well authenticated reports of abuse, amounting to a total of ten years, which means that during his 34 years of life a considerable proportion of his life has been behind bars on the basis of being alleged security threat, but without any opportunity for elemental due process in the form of opportunity to counter evidence, presumption of innocence, and confronting accusations. Amnesty International has recently again called for an international investigation of the treatment of Palestinian detainees and reassurances that Palestinians are not being punished because they have recourse to hunger strikes.
It is important to be reminded of the context of hunger strikes. Such undertakings require great determination of which most of us are incapable, and an exceptionally strong inner commitment that connects life and death in a powerful, almost mystical, unity. It is no wonder that Palestinian hunger strikers have been inspired by the 1989 Tiananman Square Declaration of Hunger Strikers: “We are not in search of death; we are looking for real life.” The ten IRA hunger strikers, led by Bobby Sands, who died in 1981 at the Maze Prison in Northern Ireland transformed the British Government’s approach to the conflict, leading to establishing at last a genuine peace process that was climaxed by the Good Friday Agreement that brought the violence mostly to an end. Hunger strikes of this depth send a signal of desperation that can only be
Ignored by a mobilization of moral insensitivity generating a condition that
Ignored by a mobilization of moral insensitivity generating a condition that
Is somewhere between what psychologists call ‘denial’ and others describe
as ‘moral numbness.’
So why has the world media ignored the Palestinian hunger strikers? Must we conclude that only Palestinian violence is newsworthy for the West?
Must Palestinian hunger striking prisoners die before their acts are of notice? Why is so much attention given to human rights abuses elsewhere in the world, and so little attention accorded to the Palestinian struggle that is supposed to engage the United Nations and underpin so much of the conflictual behavior in the Middle East? Aside from a few online blogs and the Electric Intifada there is a media blackout about these most recent hunger strikes, another confirmation of the Politics of Invisibility when it comes to Palestinian victimization.
After all, the United Nations, somewhat ill-advisedly, is one of the four parties (the others being the United States, Russia, theEuropean Union) composing The Quartet, which has set forth the roadmap that is supposed to produce peace, and should exhibit some special responsibility for such a breach of normalcy in the treatment of Palestinians detained in Israeli prisons. Addameer, al-Haq, and Physicians for Human Rights-Israel have called on three international actors to do something about this situation, at the very least, by way of fact-finding missions and reports—UN High Commissioner of Human Rights, the European Union, and the High Contracting Parties of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Is it too much to expect some sort of response? We do not expect the United States Government, so partisan in all aspects of the conflict, to raise its voice despite its protestations of concern about human rights in a wide array of countries and despite President Obama’s almost forgotten promises made in his June 2009 Cairo speech to understand the suffering of the Palestinian people and to turn a new page in Middle Eastern policy.
Since I have been following this saga of hunger strikes unfold in recent months, starting with Khader Adnan and Hana Shalabi in December 2011, I have been deeply moved by the consistently elevated human quality of these hunger strikers that is disclosed through their statements and interactions with family members and the public. Their words of devotion and loving solidarity are possessed of an authenticity only associated with feelings rarely expressed except in extreme situations when life itself is in jeopardy. This tenderness of language, an absence of hate and even bitterness, and a tone of deep love and devotion is what makes these statements from the heart so compelling. I find these sentiments to be spiritually uplifting. Such utterances deserve to be as widely shared as possible to allow for a better understanding of what is being lost through this long night of the soul afflicting the Palestinian people. Surely, also, the politics of struggle is implicit, but the feelings being expressed are at once deeply political and beyond politics.
I can only hope that informed and sensitive writers, poets, singers, and journalists, especially among the Palestinians, who share my understanding of these hunger strikes will do their best to convey to the world the meaning of such Palestinian explorations in the interior politics of nonviolence. These are stories that deserve to be told in their fullness maybe by interviews, maybe through a series of biographical sketches, maybe by poems, paintings, and songs, but they need to be told at this time in the same spirit of love, empathy, solidarity, and urgency that animates theses utterances of the Palestinian hunger strikers.
I paste below one sample to illustrate what I have been trying to express: a letter from Hassan Safadi to his mother written during his current hunger strike, published on July 30, 2012 by the Electric Intifada, translated from Arabic by a young Palestinian blogger, Linah Alsaafin, who contributed a moving commentary that is a step in the direction I am encouraging:
“First I want to thank you dear mother for your wonderful letter, whose every word penetrated my heart and immersed me in happiness, love and tenderness. I am blessed to have a mother like you. Please thank everyone who stood in solidarity and prayed for me.
What increased my happiness and contentment was you writing that you raise your head up proudly because of me…I hope your head will always be lifted high and your spirits elevated oh loved one. As for waiting for my release, I remind you mother we are believers.
We are waiting for God’s mercy with patience…as Prophet Muhammad related God’s words, “I am as my slave thinks…” As you await my release, think positively and God willing, God will not leave you and your work and He will not disappoint your expectations.
Thank God I have a mother like you, a patient believer who prays for me from her heart, and I thank you dear mother for the beautiful song you wrote that warmed my chest as I read the lyrics..
Congratulations to Nelli’s [his sister] twins…I pray to God they will be attributed to Muslims and to Islam and for them to receive the best upbringing, and for their time to be better than our time.
Say hello and salute Abu Jamal and thank him for his efforts and say hello to Ayah and Amir and tell them I miss them, tell everyone who asked about me I say hello, and pray for them.
How beautiful the last line in your letter is! “God is with you, may He protect you and take care of you…I leave you in His safe hands.”
Please mother, always pray for me using those words especially in the month of Ramadan, happy holidays.
Your son”
Monday, July 2, 2012
Palestinians and Israeli citizens united against apartheid Zionism
Israeli citizens have poured into the streets of several major cities to demonstrate against worsening economic and social inequalities, price hikes and reduced living standards.
Prior to this latest street protest, thousands of people gathered in and around Tel Aviv's Habima Square on June 23 with some 85 reportedly arrested. Protesters were shouting, “The nation is after social justice and democracy” and chanted slogans against Tel Aviv's Mayor Ron Huldai and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Press TV has conducted an interview with author of the Hidden History of Zionism, Ralph Schoenman from Berkeley to further discuss the issue.
The program also provides opinions of two additional guests: writer and radio host, Stephen Lendman from Chicago and Mofeed Jaber with the Center for ME Studies and Public Relations. The following is a rough transcript of the interview.
Press TV: What is your take on all of this? We have heard different perspectives, but is it that Israel has set up an elitist society and that the benefits are just going to a certain percentage of the masses or how do you see the problems that they are facing right now from economic perspective?
Schoenman: Well, in the first place we have to understand the parasitic nature of the Zionist state, which is essentially an extension of the US imperialism and its shock troops subsidized and sustained in that way for a very long period of time, a hundred billion dollars in just the last forty years and that is just the official aid number.
The numbers in reality are far greater than that because these so-called loans are never called in and the banking structure with respect to the Zionist State utilizes Israeli-controlled banks at far lower interest rates for the funds of the major states such as California.
So the Israeli state is an apparatus designed by imperialism to function as its shock troops in the region. Within that context of course as you have been describing, the structure of power in Israel is a parot or image of the nature of the corporate capitalism in the stage of terminal decay.
There is a huge concentration of power in the hands of a tiny oligarchy, largely tied to the profiteering from military production for the imperia, but for the most part, the privileged in Israel are increasingly shrinking to a handful.
Saturday, May 26, 2012
What is New in the Israel/Palestine Conflict
Peter Falk
Undoubtedly transfixed by the extraordinary developments throughout the Arab world since Mohamed Boazizi’s self-immolation on December 17, 2010: from Tahrir Square to the NATO intervention in Libya to bloody confrontations in Syria, Yemen, Bahrain to the eerie quiet in Algeria to the relative and temporary calm in Morocco, there has been a widespread few have noticed that the Israeli/Palestine conflict has changed its character in fundamental respects during the last couple of years.
For some the first of these transformative developments may have been realized for somewhat longer, but now almost everybody knows, except for those in high places, especially in Washington and Tel Aviv who seem to have a political need not to know. The stark fact is that both Israel and Palestine have no hope that international negotiations between governmental representatives of the two sides has any chance of reaching an agreement that will end the conflict. Israelis, especially those backing the Netanyahu government never desired or believed in the possibility of a diplomatic solution. The ‘peace process’ that started in Oslo back in 1993 has steadily deteriorated the Palestinian prospects while enhancing those of Israel; it has been worse than gridlock for the Palestinians and a smokescreen for Israelis to carry out their expansionist plans while pretending to be pursuing a political compromise based on withdrawing from land occupied in 1967. The sequel to Oslo has been a pathetic enterprise, taking the form of ‘the quartet’ (U.S., European Union, Russia, and the UN) setting forth a roadmap that was supposed to lead the Palestinians to a state of their own drawn along the borders of the green line, but in practice has been a charade that Israel has scoffed at while representatives of the Palestinian Authority seemed to believe that it was worth playing along, although working within the confines of the occupation to establish governmental institutions that could claim statehood by unilateral self-assertion. The PA did seize this option last September when President Mahmoud Abbas made his historic plea to the UN General Assembly, but was stymied by exertion of U.S. geopolitical muscle on Israel’s behalf. At this point even the PA seems to have abandoned its effort to challenge a supposed status quo that is more realistically comprehended as a toxic mixture of annexation and apartheid should no longer be called ‘occupation.’
Apparently to please Washington, and to a lesser extent the EU, neither Tel Aviv nor the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah have openly repudiated diplomacy, and continue to give lip service to a readiness to talk yet again, although the PA has at least the dignity to insist that no further negotiations can occur until Israel agrees to halt settlement expansion in the West Bank. To demand that Israel discontinue unlawful activities that impact upon what is being discussed should be regarded as a no brainer, but it is treated by the world media as though the Palestinians were seeking a huge concession from the Israelis, and in a way it is, if we acknowledge that the Netanyahu government is essentially a regime under the control of the settlers.
The second of these under observed developments in the conflict is a definite shift toward nonviolence by the Palestinians. In different sites of struggle the Palestinians have confirmed the declarations of their leaders that resistance no longer primarily refers to armed struggle and suicide bombings, but is based on a range of nonviolent undertakings that challenge the legitimacy of Israeli policies, above all its oppressive policies and structures of abuse and exploitation in the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza.
 |
| Mohamed Boazizif: The spark that ignited Arab Spring |
For some the first of these transformative developments may have been realized for somewhat longer, but now almost everybody knows, except for those in high places, especially in Washington and Tel Aviv who seem to have a political need not to know. The stark fact is that both Israel and Palestine have no hope that international negotiations between governmental representatives of the two sides has any chance of reaching an agreement that will end the conflict. Israelis, especially those backing the Netanyahu government never desired or believed in the possibility of a diplomatic solution. The ‘peace process’ that started in Oslo back in 1993 has steadily deteriorated the Palestinian prospects while enhancing those of Israel; it has been worse than gridlock for the Palestinians and a smokescreen for Israelis to carry out their expansionist plans while pretending to be pursuing a political compromise based on withdrawing from land occupied in 1967. The sequel to Oslo has been a pathetic enterprise, taking the form of ‘the quartet’ (U.S., European Union, Russia, and the UN) setting forth a roadmap that was supposed to lead the Palestinians to a state of their own drawn along the borders of the green line, but in practice has been a charade that Israel has scoffed at while representatives of the Palestinian Authority seemed to believe that it was worth playing along, although working within the confines of the occupation to establish governmental institutions that could claim statehood by unilateral self-assertion. The PA did seize this option last September when President Mahmoud Abbas made his historic plea to the UN General Assembly, but was stymied by exertion of U.S. geopolitical muscle on Israel’s behalf. At this point even the PA seems to have abandoned its effort to challenge a supposed status quo that is more realistically comprehended as a toxic mixture of annexation and apartheid should no longer be called ‘occupation.’
Apparently to please Washington, and to a lesser extent the EU, neither Tel Aviv nor the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah have openly repudiated diplomacy, and continue to give lip service to a readiness to talk yet again, although the PA has at least the dignity to insist that no further negotiations can occur until Israel agrees to halt settlement expansion in the West Bank. To demand that Israel discontinue unlawful activities that impact upon what is being discussed should be regarded as a no brainer, but it is treated by the world media as though the Palestinians were seeking a huge concession from the Israelis, and in a way it is, if we acknowledge that the Netanyahu government is essentially a regime under the control of the settlers.
The second of these under observed developments in the conflict is a definite shift toward nonviolence by the Palestinians. In different sites of struggle the Palestinians have confirmed the declarations of their leaders that resistance no longer primarily refers to armed struggle and suicide bombings, but is based on a range of nonviolent undertakings that challenge the legitimacy of Israeli policies, above all its oppressive policies and structures of abuse and exploitation in the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza.
Friday, May 11, 2012
Thousands march across the West Bank in support of the prisoners’ hunger strike
MondoWeiss
Marches, demonstrations and clashes took place all across the West Bank in solidarity with the Palestinian prisoners' hunger strike, on its 25th day.
Thousands took to the streets today in Palestinian cities and villages across the West Bank, in solidarity with over 2,000 Palestinian political prisoners on hunger strike.
Hundreds protested in the town of Beitunia, adjacent to Ramallah, in front of the Israeli Ofer prison and military court, which have become a recent flashpoint with nearly daily demonstrations. Several moderate injuries from rubber-coated bullets and tear-gas projectiles were recorded, including one to the head.
Twenty year-old Majd Barghouti was injured in the eye by a rubber-coated bullet shot by Israeli soldiers who tried to suppress another demonstration, in the village of Aboud, north-east of Ramallah. He was evacuated to the Ramallah hospital, where he is expected to undergo surgery.
In the village of Kufer Qaddoum, south-east of Nablus, hundreds went out to demonstrate despite a tight siege laid over the town from all sides. In their attempt to quell the protest, Israeli forces used tear-gas, rubber-coated bullets and a high-pressure water cannon hosing a foul-smelling liquid, which Israel calls the Skunk. About an hour into the demonstration, a group of soldiers shot live ammunition towards the protesters from a fairly short range, but did not manage to hit anyone.
Some 300 demonstrators gathered in the village of al-Walajeh, east of Bethlehem, which will soon be encircled by Israel's Wall from all sides. The march advanced towards a nearby settler-road, and for a short time, protesters managed to re-take a house whose residents were expelled by Israel in 1948. As they pushed the protesters back into the village, soldiers used mass amounts of tear-gas and shot rubber-coated bullets.
Additionally, thousands of people marched through the cities of Hebron, Ramallah and Nablus, as well as in the villages of Bil'in, Nabi Saleh, Ni'ilin and al-Ma'asra.
Background
25 days ago, on April 17, some 2,000 Palestinian political prisoners in Israeli jails launched an open-ended hunger. Their demands are simple and the strike's slogan, echoing through the prison walls, is just as plain - liberty or death. The lives of all prisoners on strike are currently in danger, but among them is a smaller group, which has been striking for a longer period and whose lives are under immediate threat.
 |
| Palestinians march in support of prisoners on hunger strike, Nablus, May 11, 2011. |
Thousands took to the streets today in Palestinian cities and villages across the West Bank, in solidarity with over 2,000 Palestinian political prisoners on hunger strike.
Hundreds protested in the town of Beitunia, adjacent to Ramallah, in front of the Israeli Ofer prison and military court, which have become a recent flashpoint with nearly daily demonstrations. Several moderate injuries from rubber-coated bullets and tear-gas projectiles were recorded, including one to the head.
Twenty year-old Majd Barghouti was injured in the eye by a rubber-coated bullet shot by Israeli soldiers who tried to suppress another demonstration, in the village of Aboud, north-east of Ramallah. He was evacuated to the Ramallah hospital, where he is expected to undergo surgery.
In the village of Kufer Qaddoum, south-east of Nablus, hundreds went out to demonstrate despite a tight siege laid over the town from all sides. In their attempt to quell the protest, Israeli forces used tear-gas, rubber-coated bullets and a high-pressure water cannon hosing a foul-smelling liquid, which Israel calls the Skunk. About an hour into the demonstration, a group of soldiers shot live ammunition towards the protesters from a fairly short range, but did not manage to hit anyone.
Some 300 demonstrators gathered in the village of al-Walajeh, east of Bethlehem, which will soon be encircled by Israel's Wall from all sides. The march advanced towards a nearby settler-road, and for a short time, protesters managed to re-take a house whose residents were expelled by Israel in 1948. As they pushed the protesters back into the village, soldiers used mass amounts of tear-gas and shot rubber-coated bullets.
Additionally, thousands of people marched through the cities of Hebron, Ramallah and Nablus, as well as in the villages of Bil'in, Nabi Saleh, Ni'ilin and al-Ma'asra.
Background
25 days ago, on April 17, some 2,000 Palestinian political prisoners in Israeli jails launched an open-ended hunger. Their demands are simple and the strike's slogan, echoing through the prison walls, is just as plain - liberty or death. The lives of all prisoners on strike are currently in danger, but among them is a smaller group, which has been striking for a longer period and whose lives are under immediate threat.
Thursday, April 19, 2012
At Israel’s behest, woman removed from Air France flight for not being Jewish
Electronic Intifadah
Ali Abunimah
Air France demanded to know the religion of a passenger on a flight from Nice to Tel Aviv and removed her because she is not a Jew.
The 15 April incident, confirmed by an Air France official, may violate international and European law by subjecting prospective passengers to illegal religious discrimination.
Over the past few days, Israeli authorities have reacted to an effort by hundreds of European travelers to visit the occupied West Bank at the invitation of Palestinians by stationing hundreds of armed police and soldiers at the main international airport at Lydd, detaining and expelling travelers, and ordering European airlines to prevent boarding of travelers that Israel has placed on a political blacklist.
Several European airlines meekly complied with these Israeli orders, canceling tickets of those arbitrarily blacklisted by Israel.
The revelation that passengers are being subjected to religious tests takes this complicity with Israel’s apartheid policies to shocking new levels.
“Are you Jewish?”
The passenger’s account was published by the website of CAPJPO-Euro-Palestine and I have translated the following passage:
A young woman, Horia A., was allowed to check-in normally and then board the aircraft. But a few minutes before take off, a flight attendant arrived at Horia’s seat and asked Horia to come with her. Isolated in a corner of the aircraft, the embarrassed flight attendant asked her a first question:
“Madame, do you have an Israeli passport?”
Horia: “No.”
“She said no,” said the flight attendant into her walkie-talkie to the ground crew.
Flight attendant: “And now, are you of Israe.. um, are you Jewish?”
Horia: “no.”
Flight attendant into walkie-talkie: “Also, no”
During the next few minutes, Horia could see interactions and comings and goings among Air France personnel, before the flight attendant confirmed to her that she was forbidden to fly, citing “a very complex situation.”
Ali Abunimah
 |
French activists protesting European airlines canceling flytilla passenger flights, 2011. |
The 15 April incident, confirmed by an Air France official, may violate international and European law by subjecting prospective passengers to illegal religious discrimination.
Over the past few days, Israeli authorities have reacted to an effort by hundreds of European travelers to visit the occupied West Bank at the invitation of Palestinians by stationing hundreds of armed police and soldiers at the main international airport at Lydd, detaining and expelling travelers, and ordering European airlines to prevent boarding of travelers that Israel has placed on a political blacklist.
Several European airlines meekly complied with these Israeli orders, canceling tickets of those arbitrarily blacklisted by Israel.
The revelation that passengers are being subjected to religious tests takes this complicity with Israel’s apartheid policies to shocking new levels.
“Are you Jewish?”
The passenger’s account was published by the website of CAPJPO-Euro-Palestine and I have translated the following passage:
A young woman, Horia A., was allowed to check-in normally and then board the aircraft. But a few minutes before take off, a flight attendant arrived at Horia’s seat and asked Horia to come with her. Isolated in a corner of the aircraft, the embarrassed flight attendant asked her a first question:
“Madame, do you have an Israeli passport?”
Horia: “No.”
“She said no,” said the flight attendant into her walkie-talkie to the ground crew.
Flight attendant: “And now, are you of Israe.. um, are you Jewish?”
Horia: “no.”
Flight attendant into walkie-talkie: “Also, no”
During the next few minutes, Horia could see interactions and comings and goings among Air France personnel, before the flight attendant confirmed to her that she was forbidden to fly, citing “a very complex situation.”
Friday, April 13, 2012
Israel prepares for pro-Palestinian activists at airport
CNN
Kareem Khadder
Israeli security forces are preparing to deport hundreds of pro-Palestinian activists expected to arrive at the country's main international airport beginning Sunday to protest Israel's policies in the occupied West Bank.
Kareem Khadder
"Israeli Police will be implementing measures inside and around Ben Gurion airport from the weekend in order to deal with the arrival of activists into the country," Israeli police spokesman Mickey Rosenfeld told CNN .
Activists for "Welcome to Palestine 2012 " one of the pro-Palestinian groups organizing what has been dubbed a "fly-in" event, said some 1500 to 2000 activists mainly from Europe, the United States, and Canada would board civilian flights for Israel in order to make their way to various events in Bethlehem and other West Bank cities.
Organizers say they are trying to draw attention to what they claim are prejudicial Israeli border policies that force many international visitors coming to Palestinian areas to lie about their destinations.
"We believe, like prisoners in prisons, we are entitled to receive visitors and Palestinians under Israeli occupation are also entitled to receive visitors," said event coordinator Mazin Qumsiyeh. "So we are entitled to get international visitors to come and visit and show solidarity with us to learn about the situation, but Israel chooses to prevent these people from coming,"
Last year organizers staged a similar event and Israel authorities detained and deported dozens of activists who entered the country.
On Tuesday Israel's public security minister, Yitzhak Aharonovitch called activists "provocateurs" and told Israeli news portal Ynet they would "be dealt with in a determined and quick way," adding that "If they arrive in Israel they will be identified, removed from the plane, their entry into Israel will be prevented and they will be moved to a detention facility until they are flown out of Israel."
Monday, March 26, 2012
Barghouti and Waskow debate BDS on Democracy Now
MondoWeiss
Excellent point made in the comments section on MondoWeiss by Phan Nguyen:
This is the second time Waskow has argued against BDS in a debate on Democracy Now. He did so two years earlier against Omar Barghouti.
His arguments are specious, but here I just want to point out his false suggestion that Martin Luther King would never support a boycott against an entire country:
Even when Dr. King clearly, publicly, vigorously opposed the Vietnam War, he did not call for a boycott of all American products and producers. He didn’t do that in Europe or in the United States. He targeted where he was aiming. And I think BDS, as presently framed, doesn’t target.
In reality, MLK supported full boycott, divestment and sanctions against Apartheid South Africa as early as 1962:
From a joint statement by MLK and Chief Albert J. Lutuli, dated 9 October 1962 and again on 10 December 1962, addressed to the international community:
Urge your Government to support economic sanctions;
Don’t buy South Africa’s products;
Don’t trade or invest in South Africa;
Translate public opinion into public action by explaining facts to all peoples, to groups to which you belong, and to countries of which you are citizens until AN EFFECTIVE INTERNATIONAL QUARANTINE OF APARTHEID IS ESTABLISHED.
From a speech in London, December 1964, en route to Oslo to receive the Nobel Peace Prize:
Our responsibility presents us with a unique opportunity. We can join in the one form of non-violent action that could bring freedom and justice to South Africa—the action which African leaders have appealed for—in a massive movement for economic sanctions.
In a world living under the appalling shadow of nuclear weapons do we not recognize the need to perfect the use of economic pressures? Why is trade regarded by all nations and all ideologies as sacred? Why does our Government, and your Government in Britain, refuse to intervene effectively now, as if only when there is a bloodbath in South Africa—or a Korea, or a Vietnam—will they recognise the crisis?
If the United Kingdom and the United States decided tomorrow morning not to buy South African goods, not to buy South African gold, to put an embargo on oil; if our investors and capitalists would withdraw their support for that racial tyranny, then apartheid would be brought to an end. Then the majority of South Africans of all races could at last build the shared society they desire.
From a speech in New York for Human Rights Day, 10 December 1965:
Today, in our opulent society, our reliance on trade with South Africa is infinitesimal significance. No real national interest impels us to be cautious, gentle, or a good customer of a nation that offends the world’s conscience…
The time has come to utilize non-violence fully through a massive international boycott which would involve the USSR, Great Britain, France, the United States, Germany and Japan. Millions of people can personally give expression to their abhorrence of the world’s worst racism through such a far-flung boycott. No nation professing a concern for man’s dignity could avoid assuming its obligations if people of all States and races were to adopt a firm stand. Nor need we confine an international boycott to South Africa. The time has come for an international alliance of peoples of all nations against racism.
Excellent point made in the comments section on MondoWeiss by Phan Nguyen:
This is the second time Waskow has argued against BDS in a debate on Democracy Now. He did so two years earlier against Omar Barghouti.
His arguments are specious, but here I just want to point out his false suggestion that Martin Luther King would never support a boycott against an entire country:
Even when Dr. King clearly, publicly, vigorously opposed the Vietnam War, he did not call for a boycott of all American products and producers. He didn’t do that in Europe or in the United States. He targeted where he was aiming. And I think BDS, as presently framed, doesn’t target.
In reality, MLK supported full boycott, divestment and sanctions against Apartheid South Africa as early as 1962:
From a joint statement by MLK and Chief Albert J. Lutuli, dated 9 October 1962 and again on 10 December 1962, addressed to the international community:
Urge your Government to support economic sanctions;
Don’t buy South Africa’s products;
Don’t trade or invest in South Africa;
Translate public opinion into public action by explaining facts to all peoples, to groups to which you belong, and to countries of which you are citizens until AN EFFECTIVE INTERNATIONAL QUARANTINE OF APARTHEID IS ESTABLISHED.
From a speech in London, December 1964, en route to Oslo to receive the Nobel Peace Prize:
Our responsibility presents us with a unique opportunity. We can join in the one form of non-violent action that could bring freedom and justice to South Africa—the action which African leaders have appealed for—in a massive movement for economic sanctions.
In a world living under the appalling shadow of nuclear weapons do we not recognize the need to perfect the use of economic pressures? Why is trade regarded by all nations and all ideologies as sacred? Why does our Government, and your Government in Britain, refuse to intervene effectively now, as if only when there is a bloodbath in South Africa—or a Korea, or a Vietnam—will they recognise the crisis?
If the United Kingdom and the United States decided tomorrow morning not to buy South African goods, not to buy South African gold, to put an embargo on oil; if our investors and capitalists would withdraw their support for that racial tyranny, then apartheid would be brought to an end. Then the majority of South Africans of all races could at last build the shared society they desire.
From a speech in New York for Human Rights Day, 10 December 1965:
Today, in our opulent society, our reliance on trade with South Africa is infinitesimal significance. No real national interest impels us to be cautious, gentle, or a good customer of a nation that offends the world’s conscience…
The time has come to utilize non-violence fully through a massive international boycott which would involve the USSR, Great Britain, France, the United States, Germany and Japan. Millions of people can personally give expression to their abhorrence of the world’s worst racism through such a far-flung boycott. No nation professing a concern for man’s dignity could avoid assuming its obligations if people of all States and races were to adopt a firm stand. Nor need we confine an international boycott to South Africa. The time has come for an international alliance of peoples of all nations against racism.
Saturday, March 17, 2012
‘No amount of reading and word of mouth could have prepared me for the reality’— Remembering Rachel Corrie
MondoWiess
Yesterday was the anniversary of the death of Rachel Corrie, the peace activist whose life was cruelly cut short in 2003 by the Israeli military when the IDF crushed her with a bulldozer. Corrie was just 23 years old when killed while volunteering with the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) in Gaza, but her memory continues to inspire many long after her death.
To those who knew her, Corrie was thoughtful, sensitive, and courageous. The ISM remembered Corrie:
It rained on Kufr Qaddoum where attack dogs clenched in their jaws the peaceful freedom fighters of Palestine, an image reminiscent of a segregated America.
It drizzled as the folks of Al Ma’sara demanded the wall to fall, an echoing cry humanity heard from Germany.
Puddles formed along Shuhada Street in Al Khalil where Apartheid still lurked despite South Africa’s continued victories.
And it watered on Gaza, where the dust never seems to settle between the murderous attacks of the Zionist military.
It is fitting to honor Corrie with a poem, as she is known for her letters and emails from Palestine to her family, compiled in a book edited by her parents, Cindy and Craig Corrie. So let us remember Corrie with an excerpt from an email sent by Corrie to family and friends, while in Rafah. The email was published in Let Me Stand Alone:
Hi friends and family, and others,
I have been in Palestine for two weeks and one hour now, and I still have very few words to describe what I see. It is most difficult for me to think about what’s going on here when I sit down to write back to the United States. Something about the virtual portal into luxury. I don’t know if many of the children here have ever existed without tank-shell holes in their walls and the towers of an occupying army surveying them constantly from the near horizons. I think, although I’m not entirely sure, that even the smallest of these children understand that life is not like this everywhere. An eight-year-old was shot and killed by an Israeli tank two days before I got here, and many of the children murmur his name to me – Ali – or point at the posters of him on the walls. The children also love to get me to practice my limited Arabic by asking me, 'Kaif Sharon?' 'Kaif Bush?' and they laugh when I say, 'Bush Majnoon', 'Sharon Majnoon' back in my limited arabic. (How is Sharon? How is Bush? Bush is crazy. Sharon is crazy.) Of course this isn’t quite what I believe, and some of the adults who have the English correct me: “Bush mish Majnoon' … Bush is a businessman. Today I tried to learn to say, 'Bush is a tool,' but I don’t think it translated quite right. But anyway, there are eight-year-olds here much more aware of the workings of the global power structure than I was just a few years ago.
Yesterday was the anniversary of the death of Rachel Corrie, the peace activist whose life was cruelly cut short in 2003 by the Israeli military when the IDF crushed her with a bulldozer. Corrie was just 23 years old when killed while volunteering with the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) in Gaza, but her memory continues to inspire many long after her death.
To those who knew her, Corrie was thoughtful, sensitive, and courageous. The ISM remembered Corrie:
It rained on Kufr Qaddoum where attack dogs clenched in their jaws the peaceful freedom fighters of Palestine, an image reminiscent of a segregated America.
It drizzled as the folks of Al Ma’sara demanded the wall to fall, an echoing cry humanity heard from Germany.
Puddles formed along Shuhada Street in Al Khalil where Apartheid still lurked despite South Africa’s continued victories.
And it watered on Gaza, where the dust never seems to settle between the murderous attacks of the Zionist military.
It is fitting to honor Corrie with a poem, as she is known for her letters and emails from Palestine to her family, compiled in a book edited by her parents, Cindy and Craig Corrie. So let us remember Corrie with an excerpt from an email sent by Corrie to family and friends, while in Rafah. The email was published in Let Me Stand Alone:
Hi friends and family, and others,
I have been in Palestine for two weeks and one hour now, and I still have very few words to describe what I see. It is most difficult for me to think about what’s going on here when I sit down to write back to the United States. Something about the virtual portal into luxury. I don’t know if many of the children here have ever existed without tank-shell holes in their walls and the towers of an occupying army surveying them constantly from the near horizons. I think, although I’m not entirely sure, that even the smallest of these children understand that life is not like this everywhere. An eight-year-old was shot and killed by an Israeli tank two days before I got here, and many of the children murmur his name to me – Ali – or point at the posters of him on the walls. The children also love to get me to practice my limited Arabic by asking me, 'Kaif Sharon?' 'Kaif Bush?' and they laugh when I say, 'Bush Majnoon', 'Sharon Majnoon' back in my limited arabic. (How is Sharon? How is Bush? Bush is crazy. Sharon is crazy.) Of course this isn’t quite what I believe, and some of the adults who have the English correct me: “Bush mish Majnoon' … Bush is a businessman. Today I tried to learn to say, 'Bush is a tool,' but I don’t think it translated quite right. But anyway, there are eight-year-olds here much more aware of the workings of the global power structure than I was just a few years ago.
Friday, February 17, 2012
THE NEXT TIME SOMEONE TELLS YOU ZIONISM IS NOT RACISM…..
Desert Peace
SHOW THEM THE PROOF THAT IT IS!
SHOW THEM THE PROOF THAT IT IS!
*
Start with these links….
*
ISRAELI RACISM MUCH WORSE THAN I THOUGHT IT WAS
*
*
*
*
The above are all recent examples … now watch the following video;
*
Don’t miss the comment at 1:02 (might be official US policy one day)
Friday, February 3, 2012
Shoes For Ki-Moon Because Eggs And Tomatoes Are Expensive
Today Thursday February 2 2012, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon arrived in the besieged Gaza concentration camp, coming through the Beit Hanoun (Erez) crossing in the northern border of the Gaza Strip
Ban Ki-moon was welcomed in a very special way at the border of Gaza, where dozens of Palestinian families of prisoners and victims of the Israeli genocide and war crimes who lost their loved ones, among them children and members of their families during the continued Israeli invasions on Gaza.
Also present were a number of Palestinians deported to Gaza by the Israeli occupation from Bethlehem and the West Bank. They all blocked the passage for the convoy of Ki-moon and hurled shoes, sticks, stones, chairs at him as an expression of their anger for the visit and his refusal to meet with them and listen to their humanitarian problems, in the same way as met during a previous visit to Israel with family of war criminal Gilad Shalit.
According to the Palestinian protesters: "eggs and tomatoes are very expensive in Gaza, therefore we were not able to buy them to throw them at the convoy of the Secretary General of the United Nations Ban ki-Moon. The protesters only had their shoes and other things to throw. After they threw their shoes, they collected them and put them on". They said "Sorry Mr. Ban Ki-moon, the economic situation in Gaza under the blockade is very much deteriorated, and eggs and tomatoes are not available".
Abdullah Kandil, the spokesperson of the of prisoners families, stated that "the Palestinians sit-in blocked the convoy of Ban Ki-moon for some time in protest against the immoral and inhumane position of Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, who refused to meet with the families of prisoners languishing in the jails of the Israeli occupation."
Kandil said in his statement that "the protesters threw chairs, stones and shoes at the convoy Ban Ki-moon, holding signs that read 'Enough of Ban Ki-moon bias for Israel’, 'Where is the United Nations since the blockade of Gaza’ and 'Where is the United Nations when the the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) members are kidnapped??".
prisoners affairs said "the Palestinian protest is a symbolic message to Mr. Ban Ki-moon that Palestinians from Gaza want to have the right to visit their children and loved ones at Israeli jails". He added: "Ban ki-Moon should make more efforts to release the Palestinian prisoners". He wondered why Mr. Ban ki-Moon, always when he visits Gaza, avoids the meeting with the families of Palestinian prisoners.
The Palestinian protesters raised the pictures of a number of prisoners, especially the Palestinian leadership of the "Fatah", among them Marwan Barghouti and Palestinian Legislative Council Speaker Aziz Dweik, who were kidnapped by the Israeli occupation.
He added: "The United Nations policy of marginalization towards the Palestinian prisoners and detainees at the Israeli prisons, where they are denied the most minimal humanitarian rights, visits, medical treatment, where they are routinely tortured, does not express a sincere, logical and humanitarian policy of the UN, but it clearly serves the dictator criminal regime of the Israeli occupation, the israeli executioners, at the expense of prisoners and Palestinian refugees".
Saturday, December 3, 2011
Israel’s grand hypocrisy: Netanyahu slams ‘anti-liberal’ Arab Spring
Global Research
Jonathan Cook
As protests raged again across the Middle East, Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, offered his assessment of the Arab Spring last week. It was, he said, an “Islamic, anti-western, anti-liberal, anti-Israeli, undemocratic wave”, adding that Israel’s Arab neighbours were “moving not forwards, but backwards”.
It takes some chutzpah – or, at least, epic self-delusion – for Israel’s prime minister to be lecturing the Arab world on liberalism and democracy at this moment.
In recent weeks, a spate of anti-democratic measures have won support from Netanyahu’s rightwing government, justified by a new security doctrine: see no evil, hear no evil, and speak no evil of Israel. If the legislative proposals pass, the Israeli courts, Israel’s human rights groups and media, and the international community will be transformed into the proverbial three monkeys.
Israel’s vigilant human rights community has been the chief target of this assault. Yesterday Netanyahu’s Likud faction and the Yisrael Beiteinu party of his far-right foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, proposed a new law that would snuff out much of the human rights community in Israel.
The bill effectively divides non-governmental organisations (NGOs) into two kinds: those defined by the right as pro-Israel and those seen as “political”, or anti-Israel. The favoured ones, such as ambulance services and universities, will continue to be lavishly funded from foreign sources, chiefly wealthy private Jewish donors from the United States and Europe.
The “political” ones – meaning those that criticise government policies, especially relating to the occupation – will be banned from receiving funds from foreign governments, their main source of income. Donations from private sources, whether Israeli or foreign, will be subject to a crippling 45 per cent tax.
The grounds for being defined as a “political” NGO are suitably vague: denying Israel’s right to exist or its Jewish and democratic character; inciting racism; supporting violence against Israel; supporting politicians or soldiers being put on trial in international courts; or backing boycotts of the state.
One human rights group warned that all groups assisting the UN's 2009 report report by Judge Richard Goldstone into war crimes committed during Israel’s attack on Gaza in winter 2008 would be vulnerable to such a law. Other organisations like Breaking the Silence, which publishes the testimonies of Israeli soldiers who have committed or witnessed war crimes, will be silenced themselves. And an Israeli Arab NGO said it feared that its work demanding equality for all Israeli citizens, including the fifth who are Palestinian, and an end to Jewish privilege would count as denying Israel’s Jewish character.
At the same time Netanyahu wants the Israeli media emasculated. Last week his government threw its weight behind a new defamation law that will leave few but milionaires in a position to criticise politicians and officials. Mr Netanyahu observed: “It may be called the Defamation Law, but I call it the ‘publication of truth law’.” The media and human rights groups fear the worst.
This monkey must speak no evil.
Another bill, backed by the justice minister, Yaacov Neeman, is designed to skew the make-up of a panel selecting judges for Israel’s supreme court. Several judicial posts are about to fall vacant, and the government hopes to stuff the court with apppointees who share its ideological worldview and will not rescind its anti-democratic legislation, including its latest attack on the human rights community. Neeman’s favoured candidate is a settler who has a history of ruling against human rights organisations.
Senior legislators from Mr Netanyahu’s party are pushing another bill that would make it nigh impossible for human rights organisations to petition the supreme court against government actions.
The judicial monkey should see no evil.
At one level, these and a host of other measures – including increasing government intimidation of the Israeli media and academia, a crackdown on whistleblowers and the recently passed boycott law, which exposes critics of the settlements to expensive court actions for damages – are designed to strengthen the occupation by disarming its critics inside Israel.
But there is another, even more valued goal: making sure that in future the plentiful horror stories from the Palestinian territories – monitored by human rights organisations, reported by the media and heard in the courts – never reach the ears of the international community.
The third monkey is supposed to hear no evil.
The crackdown is justified in the Israeli right’s view on the grounds that criticism of the occupation represents not domestic concerns but unwelcome foreign interference in Israel’s affairs. The promotion of human rights – whether in Israel, the occupied territories or the Arab world – is considered by Netanyahu and his allies as inherently un-Israeli and anti-Israeli.
The hypocrisy is hard to stomach. Israel has long claimed special dispensation to interfere in the affairs of both the EU and the United States. Jewish Agency staff proselytise among European and American Jews to persuade them to emigrate to Israel. Uniquely, Israel’s security agencies are given free rein at airports around the world to harass and invade the privacy of non-Jews flying to Tel Aviv. And Israel’s political proxies abroad – sophisticated lobby groups like AIPAC in the US – act as foreign agents while not registering as such.
Of course, Israel’s qualms against foreign meddling are selective. No restrictions are planned for rightwing Jews from abroad, such as US casino magnate Irving Moskowitz, who have pumped enormous sums into propping up illegal Jewish settlements built on Palestinian land.
There is a faulty logic too to Israel’s argument. As human rights activists point out, the areas where they do most of their work are located not in Israel but in the Palestinian territories, which Israel is occupying in violation of international law.
Privately, European embassies have been trying to drive home this point. The EU gives Israel preferential trading status, worth billions of dollars annually to the Israeli economy, on condition that it respects human rights in the occupied territories. Europe argues it is, therefore, entitled to fund the monitoring of Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians. More’s the pity that Europe fails to act on the information it receives.
Given the right’s strengthening hand, it can be expected to devise ever more creative ways to silence the human rights community and Israeli media and emasculate the courts as way to end the bad press.
Jonathan Cook
It takes some chutzpah – or, at least, epic self-delusion – for Israel’s prime minister to be lecturing the Arab world on liberalism and democracy at this moment.
In recent weeks, a spate of anti-democratic measures have won support from Netanyahu’s rightwing government, justified by a new security doctrine: see no evil, hear no evil, and speak no evil of Israel. If the legislative proposals pass, the Israeli courts, Israel’s human rights groups and media, and the international community will be transformed into the proverbial three monkeys.
Israel’s vigilant human rights community has been the chief target of this assault. Yesterday Netanyahu’s Likud faction and the Yisrael Beiteinu party of his far-right foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, proposed a new law that would snuff out much of the human rights community in Israel.
The bill effectively divides non-governmental organisations (NGOs) into two kinds: those defined by the right as pro-Israel and those seen as “political”, or anti-Israel. The favoured ones, such as ambulance services and universities, will continue to be lavishly funded from foreign sources, chiefly wealthy private Jewish donors from the United States and Europe.
The “political” ones – meaning those that criticise government policies, especially relating to the occupation – will be banned from receiving funds from foreign governments, their main source of income. Donations from private sources, whether Israeli or foreign, will be subject to a crippling 45 per cent tax.
The grounds for being defined as a “political” NGO are suitably vague: denying Israel’s right to exist or its Jewish and democratic character; inciting racism; supporting violence against Israel; supporting politicians or soldiers being put on trial in international courts; or backing boycotts of the state.
One human rights group warned that all groups assisting the UN's 2009 report report by Judge Richard Goldstone into war crimes committed during Israel’s attack on Gaza in winter 2008 would be vulnerable to such a law. Other organisations like Breaking the Silence, which publishes the testimonies of Israeli soldiers who have committed or witnessed war crimes, will be silenced themselves. And an Israeli Arab NGO said it feared that its work demanding equality for all Israeli citizens, including the fifth who are Palestinian, and an end to Jewish privilege would count as denying Israel’s Jewish character.
At the same time Netanyahu wants the Israeli media emasculated. Last week his government threw its weight behind a new defamation law that will leave few but milionaires in a position to criticise politicians and officials. Mr Netanyahu observed: “It may be called the Defamation Law, but I call it the ‘publication of truth law’.” The media and human rights groups fear the worst.
This monkey must speak no evil.
Another bill, backed by the justice minister, Yaacov Neeman, is designed to skew the make-up of a panel selecting judges for Israel’s supreme court. Several judicial posts are about to fall vacant, and the government hopes to stuff the court with apppointees who share its ideological worldview and will not rescind its anti-democratic legislation, including its latest attack on the human rights community. Neeman’s favoured candidate is a settler who has a history of ruling against human rights organisations.
Senior legislators from Mr Netanyahu’s party are pushing another bill that would make it nigh impossible for human rights organisations to petition the supreme court against government actions.
The judicial monkey should see no evil.
At one level, these and a host of other measures – including increasing government intimidation of the Israeli media and academia, a crackdown on whistleblowers and the recently passed boycott law, which exposes critics of the settlements to expensive court actions for damages – are designed to strengthen the occupation by disarming its critics inside Israel.
But there is another, even more valued goal: making sure that in future the plentiful horror stories from the Palestinian territories – monitored by human rights organisations, reported by the media and heard in the courts – never reach the ears of the international community.
The third monkey is supposed to hear no evil.
The crackdown is justified in the Israeli right’s view on the grounds that criticism of the occupation represents not domestic concerns but unwelcome foreign interference in Israel’s affairs. The promotion of human rights – whether in Israel, the occupied territories or the Arab world – is considered by Netanyahu and his allies as inherently un-Israeli and anti-Israeli.
The hypocrisy is hard to stomach. Israel has long claimed special dispensation to interfere in the affairs of both the EU and the United States. Jewish Agency staff proselytise among European and American Jews to persuade them to emigrate to Israel. Uniquely, Israel’s security agencies are given free rein at airports around the world to harass and invade the privacy of non-Jews flying to Tel Aviv. And Israel’s political proxies abroad – sophisticated lobby groups like AIPAC in the US – act as foreign agents while not registering as such.
Of course, Israel’s qualms against foreign meddling are selective. No restrictions are planned for rightwing Jews from abroad, such as US casino magnate Irving Moskowitz, who have pumped enormous sums into propping up illegal Jewish settlements built on Palestinian land.
There is a faulty logic too to Israel’s argument. As human rights activists point out, the areas where they do most of their work are located not in Israel but in the Palestinian territories, which Israel is occupying in violation of international law.
Privately, European embassies have been trying to drive home this point. The EU gives Israel preferential trading status, worth billions of dollars annually to the Israeli economy, on condition that it respects human rights in the occupied territories. Europe argues it is, therefore, entitled to fund the monitoring of Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians. More’s the pity that Europe fails to act on the information it receives.
Given the right’s strengthening hand, it can be expected to devise ever more creative ways to silence the human rights community and Israeli media and emasculate the courts as way to end the bad press.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
