27 février 2012, Association France Palestine Solidarité http://www.france-palestine.org (France)
L’Association israélienne Zochrot (Se souvenir) lutte pour intro¬duire en Israël la mémoire de la Nakba. Elle a recueilli le témoignage de A. N. , soldat d’une unité du Palmach en 1948, qui revient sur les conditions du nettoyage ethnique.
Une séance publique à Zochrot, un témoignage donné par Amnon Neumann, soldat de l'unité du Palmach en 1948, qui décrit l'occupation des villages du Néguev.
quarta-feira, 29 de fevereiro de 2012
Israel Enlists Azerbaijan as Anti-Iran Ally Through Weapons Sales, Bribes
26 February 2012, Tikun Olam-תיקון עולם http://www.richardsilverstein.com (USA)
Azerbijian on the regional crossroads of espionage and intrigue among Russia, Iran, Turkey, Iraq, the U.S. and Israel
AP reports that Israel’s leading aerospace contractor has inked a $1.6-billion deal to supply Azerbaijan with drones, missiles, and other advanced military hardware, which would be used to arm a potential frontline state in the war against Iran. Israel has used such arms deals to create intimate military and intelligence links with nations as varied as Georgia, Russia and India.
Sheera Frenkel also reported recently on Azerbaijan as a Wild West outpost. It plays a major role in the war of nerves among Iran, Israel and the west. She interviews a Mossad agent who has served years there and only set foot in the Israeli embassy once. She tells of a country riddled with spy networks working one or both sides of the street. The officials of the government seem to be available to the highest bidder. It’s a bit like a central American or Caribbean country packed with corrupt drug dealers using the country for trans-shipments of drugs and guns. Except that in Azerbaijan the drug dealers are spooks and assassins.
Iran accuses the country of being a safe harbor for the Mossad/MEK conspirators who’ve been knocking off Iran’s nuclear scientists. Though there are many Iranian Azeris living on both sides of the border, there seems little love lost among these two neighbors. Brotherly relations have become corrupted by money, power, oil and arms.
It is especially the sort of place where one side or the other will decide to make an example of Azerbaijan for its collusion with the other. If not a plot to bomb the Israeli embassy then some other suitably gory plan. Baku would be a perfect Sarajevo as a catalyst for regional war, just as the latter city was a site for the assassination that initiated World War I. The Azeris and their willing foreign co-conspirators are playing with fire and it’s only a matter of time before the conflagration breaks out with a vengeance.
AP reports that Israel’s leading aerospace contractor has inked a $1.6-billion deal to supply Azerbaijan with drones, missiles, and other advanced military hardware, which would be used to arm a potential frontline state in the war against Iran. Israel has used such arms deals to create intimate military and intelligence links with nations as varied as Georgia, Russia and India.
Sheera Frenkel also reported recently on Azerbaijan as a Wild West outpost. It plays a major role in the war of nerves among Iran, Israel and the west. She interviews a Mossad agent who has served years there and only set foot in the Israeli embassy once. She tells of a country riddled with spy networks working one or both sides of the street. The officials of the government seem to be available to the highest bidder. It’s a bit like a central American or Caribbean country packed with corrupt drug dealers using the country for trans-shipments of drugs and guns. Except that in Azerbaijan the drug dealers are spooks and assassins.
Iran accuses the country of being a safe harbor for the Mossad/MEK conspirators who’ve been knocking off Iran’s nuclear scientists. Though there are many Iranian Azeris living on both sides of the border, there seems little love lost among these two neighbors. Brotherly relations have become corrupted by money, power, oil and arms.
It is especially the sort of place where one side or the other will decide to make an example of Azerbaijan for its collusion with the other. If not a plot to bomb the Israeli embassy then some other suitably gory plan. Baku would be a perfect Sarajevo as a catalyst for regional war, just as the latter city was a site for the assassination that initiated World War I. The Azeris and their willing foreign co-conspirators are playing with fire and it’s only a matter of time before the conflagration breaks out with a vengeance.
HOMS: HORROR OF ORGANISED ARMED GROUPS, NOT DAMASCUS
29 February 2012, Alternative Information Center (AIC) http://www.alternativenews.org (Israel)
Silvia Cattori, http://www.silviacattori.net
A direct testimony from the Syrian city of Homs collected by the Swiss journalist Silvia Cattori, who paints a very different picture than that spread by a majority of western media. Since 6 February Cattori has lost contact with her local informants, terrorized by armed groups "wildly shelling, killing to kill”, as reported in an interview with an inhabitant of Homs [1]. Despite the loss of contact, this analysis remains important.
Homs, now, is nothing but a sinister battlefield where government soldiers face armed groups which, according to independent witnesses about the true nature of the rebellion, are blindly firing cannon shots to sow terror and death, then pretending that only government forces are bombarding the city.
The Western media continue, for its part, to adduce as evidence the statements of local committees which spread propaganda of the armed "opponents", in coordination with the Syrian Observatory of Human Rights, a London-based body created and funded by the rebellion-allied forces [2].
To understand what happens in Syria, it is therefore not possible to rely on the Syrian Observatory or on bloggers who are part of this rebellion. We also cannot rely on foreign correspondents who are, as we can see, systematically and from the heart and soul on the side of the armed "opponents", qualifying them as "heroes" and presenting the battle that divides the Syrian people in an entirely Manichaean way: On one side the opposition which "struggles for democracy", and on the other the terrible dictator.
Now, things are as follows. As demonstrated by a recent poll, as well as by the massive demonstrations in support of the Russian and Chinese veto at the UN, the vast majority of the Syrian people do not want this armed revolt, which seeks solely to legitimize NATO powers and several Arab states - notoriously known as champions of democracy, such as Qatar.
If you want to speak of "heroes" in Syria, then you should refer to all parties who are suffering, not only to the "heroes" recognized by the West ...
How many Milan missiles were handed over to the rebels?
The number of Syrian citizens appealing to to their president for intervention of government forces is very high. This is especially true in Homs, where the situation is alarming because large sections of the population are held hostage by these groups occupying entire areas of the city - the neighborhoods of Baba Amr, Khaldiyeh, Karm el-Zeytoun - where the people have been calling for months for Damascus to rescue them [3].
Their fate has become even more a source of anxiety since the same Milan anti-tank missile launchers delivered to the Libyan rebels during the Libyan campaign, less than a year ago, by France and Qatar, began to be used. We can remember how at the time Sarkozy and Bernard Henry Levy misled public opinion by putting the blame on forces loyal to Gaddafi for the use of these Milan missiles, which were taking a heavy toll on the people of Syria.
This is the same disturbing scenario repeating itself in Syria. Politicians, journalists and NGOs are once again taking a firm stand concerning the war, provoked by groups exploited by foreign powers. They attribute to the government forces, as was done in Libya and without proper inspection, the acts of barbarism perpetrated by the armed 'opponents' who are terrorizing the majority of the population.
For three weeks correspondents have been repeating that Homs has been unilaterally shelled by the Syrian army. On the contrary, the loyalist contingents attacked by the Milan missiles have suffered heavy losses since the beginning of their intervention. It is not clear whether the authorities in Damascus will be able to dislodge these groups with heavy weaponry from all quarters of the city.
Could the Syrian government not respond?
From the beginning of these battles it has been repeatedly demonstrated that the armed ‘rebels’ are trained, drilled and formed by foreign special forces; and that among their ranks the opponents have elements acting on behalf of foreign powers whose presence in Syria is self-evident. Syrian television has recently disseminated pictures of Homs taken by a foreign "war photographer" who followed and filmed these armed "opponents" - the same ones glorified by the "great reporters" – who wildly launch rockets and missiles. An image has attracted attention: In a building, whose stairs are dirty with blood and destroyed furniture, a surprising graffiti with heavy meaning stood out on a wall: "From Misurata, after we have freed Lybia, we came to free Syria!"
Who is responsible for the massacres of Homs, and which objectives does he pursue?
These armed groups, whose most violent actions are attributed to Al Assad soldiers facing them, are systematically presented by the Western press as "foes" fighting for "democracy."
Why do "great reporters" not bring evidence of Syrian victims of abductions, tortures and murders by these armed "opponents"? Why has the President of "Doctors without Borders" recently contributed to this process of intoxication, showing as credible the testimonies of anonymous Syrians with covered faces - standing side by side with the rebels, and attributing to Al-Assad forces and to the hospitals’ doctors unspeakable acts of torture and injury of children? [4]
Who would believe in Bashar Al Assad’s interest in torturing his people, in raping children and girls? Who would believe that the majority of the Syrian people would continue supporting Bashar Al Assad if he was really such a bloody torturer as painted in the West for the purpose of war propaganda?
These incessant campaigns which defend the violent opposition, and not the people terrorized and oppressed by these rebels, are dangerous. They aim to bring grist to foreign power’s mill - France, Great Britain, the United States, backed by Qatar and Saudi Arabia – which have been preparing for months the ground for a military intervention in Syria, and are just waiting for the green light by Obama.
[1] See the interview in French here.
[2] The Syrian Observatory of Human Rights - which collects the statements of various local committees in Syria - has been repeatedly denounced as nothing but a vulgar instrument of disinformation in the service of the revolt. Despite ample evidence of that, it remains the principal source of information from Syria - together with the famous "great reporters" – and the entire Western media are referring to it, spreading day after day the reports by this rip-of observatory.
[3] See: "A Syrian who had killed his brother in Homs by 'opponents' witnesses' story picked up by Nadia Khost, February 8, 2012.
[4] The role of NGOs that have contributed to the misinformation affecting Syria and thus increasing the risk of foreign intervention, and in particular Amnesty International and Medecins Sans Frontières et. is subject of my further investigations.
This article was first been published in French and translated by the Alternative Information Center (AIC).
Silvia Cattori, http://www.silviacattori.net
A direct testimony from the Syrian city of Homs collected by the Swiss journalist Silvia Cattori, who paints a very different picture than that spread by a majority of western media. Since 6 February Cattori has lost contact with her local informants, terrorized by armed groups "wildly shelling, killing to kill”, as reported in an interview with an inhabitant of Homs [1]. Despite the loss of contact, this analysis remains important.
Homs, now, is nothing but a sinister battlefield where government soldiers face armed groups which, according to independent witnesses about the true nature of the rebellion, are blindly firing cannon shots to sow terror and death, then pretending that only government forces are bombarding the city.
The Western media continue, for its part, to adduce as evidence the statements of local committees which spread propaganda of the armed "opponents", in coordination with the Syrian Observatory of Human Rights, a London-based body created and funded by the rebellion-allied forces [2].
To understand what happens in Syria, it is therefore not possible to rely on the Syrian Observatory or on bloggers who are part of this rebellion. We also cannot rely on foreign correspondents who are, as we can see, systematically and from the heart and soul on the side of the armed "opponents", qualifying them as "heroes" and presenting the battle that divides the Syrian people in an entirely Manichaean way: On one side the opposition which "struggles for democracy", and on the other the terrible dictator.
Now, things are as follows. As demonstrated by a recent poll, as well as by the massive demonstrations in support of the Russian and Chinese veto at the UN, the vast majority of the Syrian people do not want this armed revolt, which seeks solely to legitimize NATO powers and several Arab states - notoriously known as champions of democracy, such as Qatar.
If you want to speak of "heroes" in Syria, then you should refer to all parties who are suffering, not only to the "heroes" recognized by the West ...
How many Milan missiles were handed over to the rebels?
The number of Syrian citizens appealing to to their president for intervention of government forces is very high. This is especially true in Homs, where the situation is alarming because large sections of the population are held hostage by these groups occupying entire areas of the city - the neighborhoods of Baba Amr, Khaldiyeh, Karm el-Zeytoun - where the people have been calling for months for Damascus to rescue them [3].
Their fate has become even more a source of anxiety since the same Milan anti-tank missile launchers delivered to the Libyan rebels during the Libyan campaign, less than a year ago, by France and Qatar, began to be used. We can remember how at the time Sarkozy and Bernard Henry Levy misled public opinion by putting the blame on forces loyal to Gaddafi for the use of these Milan missiles, which were taking a heavy toll on the people of Syria.
This is the same disturbing scenario repeating itself in Syria. Politicians, journalists and NGOs are once again taking a firm stand concerning the war, provoked by groups exploited by foreign powers. They attribute to the government forces, as was done in Libya and without proper inspection, the acts of barbarism perpetrated by the armed 'opponents' who are terrorizing the majority of the population.
For three weeks correspondents have been repeating that Homs has been unilaterally shelled by the Syrian army. On the contrary, the loyalist contingents attacked by the Milan missiles have suffered heavy losses since the beginning of their intervention. It is not clear whether the authorities in Damascus will be able to dislodge these groups with heavy weaponry from all quarters of the city.
Could the Syrian government not respond?
From the beginning of these battles it has been repeatedly demonstrated that the armed ‘rebels’ are trained, drilled and formed by foreign special forces; and that among their ranks the opponents have elements acting on behalf of foreign powers whose presence in Syria is self-evident. Syrian television has recently disseminated pictures of Homs taken by a foreign "war photographer" who followed and filmed these armed "opponents" - the same ones glorified by the "great reporters" – who wildly launch rockets and missiles. An image has attracted attention: In a building, whose stairs are dirty with blood and destroyed furniture, a surprising graffiti with heavy meaning stood out on a wall: "From Misurata, after we have freed Lybia, we came to free Syria!"
Who is responsible for the massacres of Homs, and which objectives does he pursue?
These armed groups, whose most violent actions are attributed to Al Assad soldiers facing them, are systematically presented by the Western press as "foes" fighting for "democracy."
Why do "great reporters" not bring evidence of Syrian victims of abductions, tortures and murders by these armed "opponents"? Why has the President of "Doctors without Borders" recently contributed to this process of intoxication, showing as credible the testimonies of anonymous Syrians with covered faces - standing side by side with the rebels, and attributing to Al-Assad forces and to the hospitals’ doctors unspeakable acts of torture and injury of children? [4]
Who would believe in Bashar Al Assad’s interest in torturing his people, in raping children and girls? Who would believe that the majority of the Syrian people would continue supporting Bashar Al Assad if he was really such a bloody torturer as painted in the West for the purpose of war propaganda?
These incessant campaigns which defend the violent opposition, and not the people terrorized and oppressed by these rebels, are dangerous. They aim to bring grist to foreign power’s mill - France, Great Britain, the United States, backed by Qatar and Saudi Arabia – which have been preparing for months the ground for a military intervention in Syria, and are just waiting for the green light by Obama.
[1] See the interview in French here.
[2] The Syrian Observatory of Human Rights - which collects the statements of various local committees in Syria - has been repeatedly denounced as nothing but a vulgar instrument of disinformation in the service of the revolt. Despite ample evidence of that, it remains the principal source of information from Syria - together with the famous "great reporters" – and the entire Western media are referring to it, spreading day after day the reports by this rip-of observatory.
[3] See: "A Syrian who had killed his brother in Homs by 'opponents' witnesses' story picked up by Nadia Khost, February 8, 2012.
[4] The role of NGOs that have contributed to the misinformation affecting Syria and thus increasing the risk of foreign intervention, and in particular Amnesty International and Medecins Sans Frontières et. is subject of my further investigations.
This article was first been published in French and translated by the Alternative Information Center (AIC).
Savoir où est fabriqué un produit est important, même et surtout quand il est étiqueté «Made in Israel»
24 février 2012, Association France Palestine Solidarité http://www.france-palestine.org (France)
AFPS - Indecosa CGT
L’Association France Palestine Soli¬darité (AFPS) et Indecosa-CGT ont alerté à maintes reprises les administrations (DGCCRF et les Douanes) sur la vente du gazéificateur Sodastream (ou Soda Club) avec un étiquetage trompeur : « Made in Israel » alors qu’il est fabriqué dans la colonie israélienne de Mishor Adumim/Maale Adumim en Cisjordanie, sous occupation militaire israélienne.
Le Procureur de Nantes vient de décider de classer sans suite la plainte de l’AFPS et d’Indecosa-CGT, malgré le procès verbal de la Direction de la répression des Fraudes qui recom¬mandait des poursuites pénales au regard de l’irrégularité de l’étiquetage du produit Soda-Club.
Dans ses attendus, le Procureur confirme de façon catégorique ce que nous disons depuis toujours : les gazéificateurs Soda-Club sont bien assemblés dans la colonie de Maale Adumin en Territoires Palestiniens Occupés. Mais selon lui cela n’influence pas l’acte d’achat, et la caractérisation du délit n’est pas suffisante pour donner lieu à poursuite pénale au titre de « tromperie sur l’origine » pour le consommateur : « les mensonges contractuels ne sont pas tous punissables »
Or pour de nombreux consommateurs, il est déterminant, sur un plan éthique, de différencier l’acte d’achat selon que le produit en question sera effectivement en provenance soit de l’Etat d’Israël proprement dit, soit d’une colonie israélienne de peuplement située en Cisjordanie, territoire palestinien illégalement occupé par Israël.
C’est d’ailleurs à ce titre qu’une consommatrice de Montpellier avec l’association de consommateurs Indecosa-CGT, après achat d’un gazéificateur Soda Club étiqueté « Made in Israel », a porté plainte contre le distributeur Darty s’estimant trompée. Comme de nombreux consommateurs, elle n’aurait pas acheté ce produit si elle avait connu son origine réelle.
On constatera, dans ce cas d’espèce, que c’est la vigilance citoyenne qui oblige l’administration à réagir.
Il est certain que nous ne pouvons accepter le classement sans suite, et nous n’en resterons donc pas là…comme nous y incitent les chefs des missions diplomatiques européennes en poste à Jérusalem, dans leur dernier rapport sur l’année 2011. Fait nouveau, ils recommandent un certain nombre de mesures contre la colonisation israé¬lienne et son expansion :
• « S’assurer que les produits manufacturés dans les colonies [à Jérusalem est] ne bénéficient pas de tarifs préférentiels dans le cadre de l’accord d’association UE-Israël
• Sensibiliser le public sur les produits des colonies, par exemple en donnant des lignes directrices sur la labellisation aux vendeurs de l’Union européenne
• Empêcher/décourager les transactions financiers des entités d’Etats membres de l’UE qui soutiennent les colonies à Jérusalem-Est
• Inviter la Commission européenne à proposer une législation européenne appropriée pour empêcher/ décourager les transactions financières en soutien à l’activité des colonies »
Le Procureur n’aurait il pas connaissance de ces recommandations ?
AFPS - Indecosa CGT
L’Association France Palestine Soli¬darité (AFPS) et Indecosa-CGT ont alerté à maintes reprises les administrations (DGCCRF et les Douanes) sur la vente du gazéificateur Sodastream (ou Soda Club) avec un étiquetage trompeur : « Made in Israel » alors qu’il est fabriqué dans la colonie israélienne de Mishor Adumim/Maale Adumim en Cisjordanie, sous occupation militaire israélienne.
Le Procureur de Nantes vient de décider de classer sans suite la plainte de l’AFPS et d’Indecosa-CGT, malgré le procès verbal de la Direction de la répression des Fraudes qui recom¬mandait des poursuites pénales au regard de l’irrégularité de l’étiquetage du produit Soda-Club.
Dans ses attendus, le Procureur confirme de façon catégorique ce que nous disons depuis toujours : les gazéificateurs Soda-Club sont bien assemblés dans la colonie de Maale Adumin en Territoires Palestiniens Occupés. Mais selon lui cela n’influence pas l’acte d’achat, et la caractérisation du délit n’est pas suffisante pour donner lieu à poursuite pénale au titre de « tromperie sur l’origine » pour le consommateur : « les mensonges contractuels ne sont pas tous punissables »
Or pour de nombreux consommateurs, il est déterminant, sur un plan éthique, de différencier l’acte d’achat selon que le produit en question sera effectivement en provenance soit de l’Etat d’Israël proprement dit, soit d’une colonie israélienne de peuplement située en Cisjordanie, territoire palestinien illégalement occupé par Israël.
C’est d’ailleurs à ce titre qu’une consommatrice de Montpellier avec l’association de consommateurs Indecosa-CGT, après achat d’un gazéificateur Soda Club étiqueté « Made in Israel », a porté plainte contre le distributeur Darty s’estimant trompée. Comme de nombreux consommateurs, elle n’aurait pas acheté ce produit si elle avait connu son origine réelle.
On constatera, dans ce cas d’espèce, que c’est la vigilance citoyenne qui oblige l’administration à réagir.
Il est certain que nous ne pouvons accepter le classement sans suite, et nous n’en resterons donc pas là…comme nous y incitent les chefs des missions diplomatiques européennes en poste à Jérusalem, dans leur dernier rapport sur l’année 2011. Fait nouveau, ils recommandent un certain nombre de mesures contre la colonisation israé¬lienne et son expansion :
• « S’assurer que les produits manufacturés dans les colonies [à Jérusalem est] ne bénéficient pas de tarifs préférentiels dans le cadre de l’accord d’association UE-Israël
• Sensibiliser le public sur les produits des colonies, par exemple en donnant des lignes directrices sur la labellisation aux vendeurs de l’Union européenne
• Empêcher/décourager les transactions financiers des entités d’Etats membres de l’UE qui soutiennent les colonies à Jérusalem-Est
• Inviter la Commission européenne à proposer une législation européenne appropriée pour empêcher/ décourager les transactions financières en soutien à l’activité des colonies »
Le Procureur n’aurait il pas connaissance de ces recommandations ?
sexta-feira, 24 de fevereiro de 2012
ADMISSION DE LA PALESTINE A L’ONU - LETTRE AUX PRESIDENTS DE REGIONS DE FRANCE METROPOLITAINE
23 février 2012, Association France Palestine Solidarité http://www.france-palestine.org (France)
Paris le 21 février 2012
Monsieur le Président,
Le 23 septembre 2011, le Président de l’Organisation de Libération de la Palestine, Monsieur Mahmoud ABBAS a remis solennellement à Monsieur Ban Ki-moon, Secrétaire général de l’ONU une demande d’admission de l’État de Palestine aux Nations Unies.
Le discours qu’il a prononcé à cette occasion devant l’Assemblée Générale a eu un retentissement international
Depuis cette date, si l’adhésion à l’UNESCO a été prononcée avec un vote positif de la France, la question de l’admission à l’ONU est toujours en suspens et l’OLP maintient sa demande d’admission en tant qu’État à part entière, dans les frontières de 1967 avec Jérusalem-Est comme capitale selon les résolutions de l’ONU.
Cette question est de la plus grande importance.
Sans résoudre naturellement toutes les questions auxquelles sont confrontés les peuples pales-tinien et israélien, cela permettrait, et ce serait considérable, d’amorcer politiquement une sortie de l’impasse actuelle des "négociations" impossibles et stériles en posant l’ensemble des para-mètres d’une négociation future, entre deux États, sur des bases clairement édictées par la communauté internationale et non plus de manière unilatérale.
La France en tant que membre permanent du Conseil de Sécurité a, nous le pensons, un rôle d’entraînement à jouer.
Malheureusement, à ce jour, le gouvernement français a fait part de son intention de ne pas voter positivement pour cette admission en renvoyant les parties à des négociations préalables. Celles-ci viennent de se tenir et ne débouchent sur rien du fait de la colonisation israélienne illégale, en particulier à Jérusalem-Est. Les Chefs de mission des 27 pays membres de l’UE ont souligné ce point avec une certaine gravité.
Le droit d’avoir un État est un droit fondamental pour le peuple palestinien - 64 ans après que l’État israélien ait été créé et reconnu - et la pleine réalisation de ce droit ne saurait être indéfiniment subordonné à l’aboutissement de négociations bilatérales impossibles - une longue expérience le montre - avec la puissance occupante.
Il nous paraît indispensable de mobiliser toutes les forces démocratiques, soucieuses de l’application du droit, pour conduire le gouvernement français à revoir sa position. A l’Assemblée nationale comme au Sénat les groupes socialistes, en particulier, ont déposé des résolutions en ce sens qui sont limpides.
C’est dans ce sens que nous souhaitons que votre Assemblée soumette au débat et au vote de ses membres un vœu appelant la France à reconnaître l’État de Palestine et à donner une suite favorable à la requête de l’OLP pour son admission à l’ONU.
À titre d’information, nous vous indiquons qu’à notre connaissance, trois Conseil régionaux ont pris une délibération dans ce sens : Pays de la Loire, Franche-Comté et Poitou-Charentes.
Dans l’attente de votre réponse que nous espérons positive,
Nous vous prions d’agréer, Monsieur le Président, l’expression de notre considération distinguée.
Jean-Claude Lefort
Président
Paris le 21 février 2012
Monsieur le Président,
Le 23 septembre 2011, le Président de l’Organisation de Libération de la Palestine, Monsieur Mahmoud ABBAS a remis solennellement à Monsieur Ban Ki-moon, Secrétaire général de l’ONU une demande d’admission de l’État de Palestine aux Nations Unies.
Le discours qu’il a prononcé à cette occasion devant l’Assemblée Générale a eu un retentissement international
Depuis cette date, si l’adhésion à l’UNESCO a été prononcée avec un vote positif de la France, la question de l’admission à l’ONU est toujours en suspens et l’OLP maintient sa demande d’admission en tant qu’État à part entière, dans les frontières de 1967 avec Jérusalem-Est comme capitale selon les résolutions de l’ONU.
Cette question est de la plus grande importance.
Sans résoudre naturellement toutes les questions auxquelles sont confrontés les peuples pales-tinien et israélien, cela permettrait, et ce serait considérable, d’amorcer politiquement une sortie de l’impasse actuelle des "négociations" impossibles et stériles en posant l’ensemble des para-mètres d’une négociation future, entre deux États, sur des bases clairement édictées par la communauté internationale et non plus de manière unilatérale.
La France en tant que membre permanent du Conseil de Sécurité a, nous le pensons, un rôle d’entraînement à jouer.
Malheureusement, à ce jour, le gouvernement français a fait part de son intention de ne pas voter positivement pour cette admission en renvoyant les parties à des négociations préalables. Celles-ci viennent de se tenir et ne débouchent sur rien du fait de la colonisation israélienne illégale, en particulier à Jérusalem-Est. Les Chefs de mission des 27 pays membres de l’UE ont souligné ce point avec une certaine gravité.
Le droit d’avoir un État est un droit fondamental pour le peuple palestinien - 64 ans après que l’État israélien ait été créé et reconnu - et la pleine réalisation de ce droit ne saurait être indéfiniment subordonné à l’aboutissement de négociations bilatérales impossibles - une longue expérience le montre - avec la puissance occupante.
Il nous paraît indispensable de mobiliser toutes les forces démocratiques, soucieuses de l’application du droit, pour conduire le gouvernement français à revoir sa position. A l’Assemblée nationale comme au Sénat les groupes socialistes, en particulier, ont déposé des résolutions en ce sens qui sont limpides.
C’est dans ce sens que nous souhaitons que votre Assemblée soumette au débat et au vote de ses membres un vœu appelant la France à reconnaître l’État de Palestine et à donner une suite favorable à la requête de l’OLP pour son admission à l’ONU.
À titre d’information, nous vous indiquons qu’à notre connaissance, trois Conseil régionaux ont pris une délibération dans ce sens : Pays de la Loire, Franche-Comté et Poitou-Charentes.
Dans l’attente de votre réponse que nous espérons positive,
Nous vous prions d’agréer, Monsieur le Président, l’expression de notre considération distinguée.
Jean-Claude Lefort
Président
I SUPPORT THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH (USA) DIVESTMENT RESOLUTION -- Rabbi Brant Rosen
22 February 2012, Shalom Rav http://rabbibrant.com (USA)
A Blog by Rabbi Brant Rosen
As a Jew, a rabbi and a person of conscience, I am voicing my support of the divestment resolution being brought to the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA) this June.
This resolution, which has been a point of divisive contention between the PC (USA) and some American Jewish organizations for many years, endorses a recommendation of divestment from Caterpillar, Motorola and Hewlett-Packard. It was put forth by the church's committee on Mission Responsibility Through Investment that recommended divestment of companies engaged in "non-peaceful pursuits in Israel/Palestine."
There is a long and tumultuous history to this resolution - here's a basic outline:
- In 1971 and 1976 the Presbyterian Church stated that it had a responsibility to ensure that its funds be invested responsibly and consistent with the church's mission.
- In 1986, the PC (USA) formed the Committee for Mission Responsibility Through Investing (MRTI) in 1986. The MRTI Committee carried out the General Assembly's wish to engage in shareholder activism and as a last resort, divest itself of companies which contravened the GA's position. Divestment would follow a phased process starting with attempted dialogue and shareholder resolutions and ultimately the total sale of and future ban on the church's holdings in a company.
- In June 2004, the PC (USA) General Assembly adopted by a vote of 431-62 a resolution that called on the MRTI Committee "to initiate a process of phased, selective divestment in multinational corporations operating in Israel." The resolution expressed the church's support of the Geneva Accord, said that "the occupation . . . has proven to be at the root of evil acts committed against innocent people on both sides of the conflict," that "the security of Israel and the Israeli people is inexorably dependent on making peace with their Palestinian neighbors", that "horrific acts of violence and deadly attacks on innocent people, whether carried out by Palestinian suicide bombers or by the Israeli military, are abhorrent and inexcusable by all measures, and are a dead-end alternative to a negotiated settlement," and that the United States government needed to be "honest, even-handed broker for peace."
- In 2005, MRTI Committee named five US-based companies - Caterpillar Inc., Citigroup, ITT Industries, Motorola and United Technologies - for initial focus and that it would engage in "progressive engagement" with the companies' management.
- In 2006, following an uproar of criticism from American Jewish organizations, the PC (USA) General Assembly overwhelmingly (483-28) replaced language adopted in 2004 that focused the "phased, selective divestment" specifically on companies working in Israel. It now called for investment in Israel, the Gaza Strip, eastern Jerusalem and the West Bank "in only peaceful pursuits." The new resolution also required the consideration of "practical realities," a "commitment to positive outcomes" and an awareness of the potential impact of strategies on "both the Israeli and Palestinian economies." The 2006 resolution also recognized Israel’s right to build a security barrier along its pre-1967 boundaries. The GA acknowledged the "hurt and misunderstanding among many members of the Jewish community and within our Presbyterian communion" that resulted from the 2004 resolution and stated that the Assembly was "grieved by the pain that this has caused, accept responsibility for the flaws in our process, and ask for a new season of mutual understanding and dialogue."
The most recent resolution is the result of this new process and now focuses on three of the original six companies under consideration. From the PC (USA) website:
The General Assembly Mission Council (GAMC) is recommending that the upcoming 220th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA) divest the church of its stock in three companies “until they have ceased profiting from non-peaceful activities in Israel-Palestine.”
The three companies are Caterpillar, Motorola Solutions and Hewlett-Packard.
At issue are their participation in the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, the construction of the “security barrier” between Israel and Palestinian territory, and the destruction of Palestinian homes, roads and fields to make way for the construction of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, which have been declared illegal under international law.
“We have run out of hope that these companies are willing to change their corporate practices [in Israel-Palestine],” said the Rev. Brian Ellison, a Kansas City pastor and chair of the denomination’s Mission Responsibility Through Investment Committee (MRTI). “We have made diligent effort to engage in conversation. We’d like to do more, to make progress, but substantial change does not seem possible.”
As stated above, I support this resolution without reservation and urge other Jewish leaders and community members to do so as well. I am deeply dismayed that along every step of this process, Jewish community organizations (among them, the Anti-Defamation League, the Simon Wiesenthal Center and the Jewish Council on Public Affairs) that purport to speak for the consensus of a diverse constituency have been intimidating and emotionally blackmailing the Presbyterian Church as they attempt to forge their ethical investment strategy in good faith.
It is extremely important to be clear about what is at stake here. First of all, this is not a resolution that seeks to boycott or single out Israel. Divestment does not target countries - it targets companies. In this regard speaking, the PC (USA)'s ethical investment process seeks to divest from specific "military-related companies" it deems are engaged in "non-peaceful" pursuits.
We'd be hard-pressed indeed to make the case that the Israeli government is engaged in "non-peaceful pursuits" in the Occupied Territories and East Jerusalem. I won't go into detail here because I've been writing about this tragic issue for many years: the increasing of illegal Jewish settlements with impunity, the forced evictions and home demolitions, the uprooting of Palestinian orchards, the separation wall that chokes off Palestinians from their lands, the arbitrary administrative detentions, the brutal crushing of non-violent protest, etc, etc.
All of us - Jews and non-Jews alike - have cause for deep moral concern over these issues. Moreover, we have cause for dismay that own government tacitly supports these actions. At the very least, we certainly have the right to make sure that our own investments do not support companies that profit from what we believe to be immoral acts committed in furtherance of Israel's occupation.
As the co-chair of the Jewish Voice for Peace Rabbinical Council, I am proud that JVP has initiated its own divestment campaign which targets the TIAA-CREF pension fund, urging it to divest from companies that profit from Israel's occupation. Among these are two of the three companies currently under consideration by PC (USA): Motorola and Caterpillar.
Why the concern over these specific companies? Because they are indisputably and directing aiding and profiting the oppression of Palestinians on the ground. Caterpillar profits from the destruction of Palestinian homes and the uprooting of Palestinian orchards by supplying the armor-plated and weaponized bulldozers that are used for such demolition work. Motorola profits from Israel’s control of the Palestinian population by providing surveillance systems around Israeli settlements, checkpoints, and military camps in the West Bank, as well as communication systems to the Israeli army and West Bank settlers.
And why is Hewlett-Packard under consideration for divestment by the PC (USA)? HP owns Electronic Data Systems, which heads a consortium providing monitoring of checkpoints, including several built inside the West Bank in violation of international law. The Israeli Navy, which regularly attacks Gaza’s fishermen within Gaza’s own territorial waters and has often shelled civilian areas in the Gaza Strip, has chosen HP Israel to implement the outsourcing of its IT infrastructure. In addition, Hewlett Packard subsidiary HP Invent outsources IT services to a company called Matrix, which employs settlers in the illegal settlement of Modi’in Illit to do much of its IT work at low wages.
I repeat: by seeking to divest from these companies the PC (USA) is not singling out Israel as a nation. The Presbyterian has every right to - and in fact does - divest its funds from any number of companies that enable non-peaceful pursuits around the world. In this case specifically, the PC (USA) has reasonably determined it considers these particular "pursuits" aid a highly militarized, brutal and oppressive occupation - and it simply does not want to be complicit in supporting companies that enable it.
I am fully aware that there are several organizations in the Jewish community that are already gearing up a full court press to intimidate the PC (USA) from passing this resolution in June. JCPA President Rabbi Steve Gutow recently accused national Presbyterian leaders of "making the delegitimization of Israel a public witness of their church." The Simon Wiesenthal Center has called the resolution" poisonous," and that by considering it the PC (USA) is "showing its moral bankruptcy."
The sorts of statements do not speak for me nor, I am sure, do they speak for the wide, diverse spectrum of opinion on the issue in the American Jewish community. There is no place for public bullying in interfaith relations - I believe this kind of browbeating is decidedly counter to principles of honest, good faith dialogue. To our Presbyterian friends: please know there are many Jewish leaders who stand with you as you seek the cause of peace and justice in Israel/Palestine.
In a recent open letter to the PC (USA), Rabbi Margaret Holub, my colleague on the JVP Rabbinical Council expressed this sentiment eloquently with the following words:
Your Church has long been active in pursuing justice and peace by nonviolent means, including divestment, in many places around the world. As Christians, you have your own particular stake in the land to which both our traditions have long attachments of faith and history. We particularly acknowledge the oppression of Palestinian Christians under Israeli occupation and the justice of your efforts to relieve the oppression directed against your fellows.
To advocate for an end to an unjust policy is not anti-Semitic. To criticize Israel is not anti-Semitic. To invest your own resources in corporations which pursue your vision of a just and peaceful world, and to withdraw your resources from those which contradict this vision, is not anti-Semitic. There is a terrible history of actual anti-Semitism perpetrated by Christians at different times throughout the millennia and conscientious Christians today do bear a burden of conscience on that account. We can understand that, with your commitment to paths of peace and justice, it must be terribly painful and inhibiting to be accused of anti-Semitism.
In fact, many of us in the Jewish community recognize that the continuing occupation of Palestine itself presents a great danger to the safety of the Jewish people, not to mention oppressing our spirits and diminishing our honor in the world community. We appreciate the solidarity of people of conscience in pursuing conscientious nonviolent strategies, such as phased selective divestment, to end the occupation.
I am proud my name is under this letter, alongside many other members of our Rabbinical Council. If you stand with us, please join us in supporting the PC (USA) divestment resolution at their GA in Pittsburgh this summer.
A Blog by Rabbi Brant Rosen
As a Jew, a rabbi and a person of conscience, I am voicing my support of the divestment resolution being brought to the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA) this June.
This resolution, which has been a point of divisive contention between the PC (USA) and some American Jewish organizations for many years, endorses a recommendation of divestment from Caterpillar, Motorola and Hewlett-Packard. It was put forth by the church's committee on Mission Responsibility Through Investment that recommended divestment of companies engaged in "non-peaceful pursuits in Israel/Palestine."
There is a long and tumultuous history to this resolution - here's a basic outline:
- In 1971 and 1976 the Presbyterian Church stated that it had a responsibility to ensure that its funds be invested responsibly and consistent with the church's mission.
- In 1986, the PC (USA) formed the Committee for Mission Responsibility Through Investing (MRTI) in 1986. The MRTI Committee carried out the General Assembly's wish to engage in shareholder activism and as a last resort, divest itself of companies which contravened the GA's position. Divestment would follow a phased process starting with attempted dialogue and shareholder resolutions and ultimately the total sale of and future ban on the church's holdings in a company.
- In June 2004, the PC (USA) General Assembly adopted by a vote of 431-62 a resolution that called on the MRTI Committee "to initiate a process of phased, selective divestment in multinational corporations operating in Israel." The resolution expressed the church's support of the Geneva Accord, said that "the occupation . . . has proven to be at the root of evil acts committed against innocent people on both sides of the conflict," that "the security of Israel and the Israeli people is inexorably dependent on making peace with their Palestinian neighbors", that "horrific acts of violence and deadly attacks on innocent people, whether carried out by Palestinian suicide bombers or by the Israeli military, are abhorrent and inexcusable by all measures, and are a dead-end alternative to a negotiated settlement," and that the United States government needed to be "honest, even-handed broker for peace."
- In 2005, MRTI Committee named five US-based companies - Caterpillar Inc., Citigroup, ITT Industries, Motorola and United Technologies - for initial focus and that it would engage in "progressive engagement" with the companies' management.
- In 2006, following an uproar of criticism from American Jewish organizations, the PC (USA) General Assembly overwhelmingly (483-28) replaced language adopted in 2004 that focused the "phased, selective divestment" specifically on companies working in Israel. It now called for investment in Israel, the Gaza Strip, eastern Jerusalem and the West Bank "in only peaceful pursuits." The new resolution also required the consideration of "practical realities," a "commitment to positive outcomes" and an awareness of the potential impact of strategies on "both the Israeli and Palestinian economies." The 2006 resolution also recognized Israel’s right to build a security barrier along its pre-1967 boundaries. The GA acknowledged the "hurt and misunderstanding among many members of the Jewish community and within our Presbyterian communion" that resulted from the 2004 resolution and stated that the Assembly was "grieved by the pain that this has caused, accept responsibility for the flaws in our process, and ask for a new season of mutual understanding and dialogue."
The most recent resolution is the result of this new process and now focuses on three of the original six companies under consideration. From the PC (USA) website:
The General Assembly Mission Council (GAMC) is recommending that the upcoming 220th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA) divest the church of its stock in three companies “until they have ceased profiting from non-peaceful activities in Israel-Palestine.”
The three companies are Caterpillar, Motorola Solutions and Hewlett-Packard.
At issue are their participation in the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, the construction of the “security barrier” between Israel and Palestinian territory, and the destruction of Palestinian homes, roads and fields to make way for the construction of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, which have been declared illegal under international law.
“We have run out of hope that these companies are willing to change their corporate practices [in Israel-Palestine],” said the Rev. Brian Ellison, a Kansas City pastor and chair of the denomination’s Mission Responsibility Through Investment Committee (MRTI). “We have made diligent effort to engage in conversation. We’d like to do more, to make progress, but substantial change does not seem possible.”
As stated above, I support this resolution without reservation and urge other Jewish leaders and community members to do so as well. I am deeply dismayed that along every step of this process, Jewish community organizations (among them, the Anti-Defamation League, the Simon Wiesenthal Center and the Jewish Council on Public Affairs) that purport to speak for the consensus of a diverse constituency have been intimidating and emotionally blackmailing the Presbyterian Church as they attempt to forge their ethical investment strategy in good faith.
It is extremely important to be clear about what is at stake here. First of all, this is not a resolution that seeks to boycott or single out Israel. Divestment does not target countries - it targets companies. In this regard speaking, the PC (USA)'s ethical investment process seeks to divest from specific "military-related companies" it deems are engaged in "non-peaceful" pursuits.
We'd be hard-pressed indeed to make the case that the Israeli government is engaged in "non-peaceful pursuits" in the Occupied Territories and East Jerusalem. I won't go into detail here because I've been writing about this tragic issue for many years: the increasing of illegal Jewish settlements with impunity, the forced evictions and home demolitions, the uprooting of Palestinian orchards, the separation wall that chokes off Palestinians from their lands, the arbitrary administrative detentions, the brutal crushing of non-violent protest, etc, etc.
All of us - Jews and non-Jews alike - have cause for deep moral concern over these issues. Moreover, we have cause for dismay that own government tacitly supports these actions. At the very least, we certainly have the right to make sure that our own investments do not support companies that profit from what we believe to be immoral acts committed in furtherance of Israel's occupation.
As the co-chair of the Jewish Voice for Peace Rabbinical Council, I am proud that JVP has initiated its own divestment campaign which targets the TIAA-CREF pension fund, urging it to divest from companies that profit from Israel's occupation. Among these are two of the three companies currently under consideration by PC (USA): Motorola and Caterpillar.
Why the concern over these specific companies? Because they are indisputably and directing aiding and profiting the oppression of Palestinians on the ground. Caterpillar profits from the destruction of Palestinian homes and the uprooting of Palestinian orchards by supplying the armor-plated and weaponized bulldozers that are used for such demolition work. Motorola profits from Israel’s control of the Palestinian population by providing surveillance systems around Israeli settlements, checkpoints, and military camps in the West Bank, as well as communication systems to the Israeli army and West Bank settlers.
And why is Hewlett-Packard under consideration for divestment by the PC (USA)? HP owns Electronic Data Systems, which heads a consortium providing monitoring of checkpoints, including several built inside the West Bank in violation of international law. The Israeli Navy, which regularly attacks Gaza’s fishermen within Gaza’s own territorial waters and has often shelled civilian areas in the Gaza Strip, has chosen HP Israel to implement the outsourcing of its IT infrastructure. In addition, Hewlett Packard subsidiary HP Invent outsources IT services to a company called Matrix, which employs settlers in the illegal settlement of Modi’in Illit to do much of its IT work at low wages.
I repeat: by seeking to divest from these companies the PC (USA) is not singling out Israel as a nation. The Presbyterian has every right to - and in fact does - divest its funds from any number of companies that enable non-peaceful pursuits around the world. In this case specifically, the PC (USA) has reasonably determined it considers these particular "pursuits" aid a highly militarized, brutal and oppressive occupation - and it simply does not want to be complicit in supporting companies that enable it.
I am fully aware that there are several organizations in the Jewish community that are already gearing up a full court press to intimidate the PC (USA) from passing this resolution in June. JCPA President Rabbi Steve Gutow recently accused national Presbyterian leaders of "making the delegitimization of Israel a public witness of their church." The Simon Wiesenthal Center has called the resolution" poisonous," and that by considering it the PC (USA) is "showing its moral bankruptcy."
The sorts of statements do not speak for me nor, I am sure, do they speak for the wide, diverse spectrum of opinion on the issue in the American Jewish community. There is no place for public bullying in interfaith relations - I believe this kind of browbeating is decidedly counter to principles of honest, good faith dialogue. To our Presbyterian friends: please know there are many Jewish leaders who stand with you as you seek the cause of peace and justice in Israel/Palestine.
In a recent open letter to the PC (USA), Rabbi Margaret Holub, my colleague on the JVP Rabbinical Council expressed this sentiment eloquently with the following words:
Your Church has long been active in pursuing justice and peace by nonviolent means, including divestment, in many places around the world. As Christians, you have your own particular stake in the land to which both our traditions have long attachments of faith and history. We particularly acknowledge the oppression of Palestinian Christians under Israeli occupation and the justice of your efforts to relieve the oppression directed against your fellows.
To advocate for an end to an unjust policy is not anti-Semitic. To criticize Israel is not anti-Semitic. To invest your own resources in corporations which pursue your vision of a just and peaceful world, and to withdraw your resources from those which contradict this vision, is not anti-Semitic. There is a terrible history of actual anti-Semitism perpetrated by Christians at different times throughout the millennia and conscientious Christians today do bear a burden of conscience on that account. We can understand that, with your commitment to paths of peace and justice, it must be terribly painful and inhibiting to be accused of anti-Semitism.
In fact, many of us in the Jewish community recognize that the continuing occupation of Palestine itself presents a great danger to the safety of the Jewish people, not to mention oppressing our spirits and diminishing our honor in the world community. We appreciate the solidarity of people of conscience in pursuing conscientious nonviolent strategies, such as phased selective divestment, to end the occupation.
I am proud my name is under this letter, alongside many other members of our Rabbinical Council. If you stand with us, please join us in supporting the PC (USA) divestment resolution at their GA in Pittsburgh this summer.
ASSOCIATION FRANCE PALESTINE SOLIDARITE : AGENDA 27 février/5 mars 2012
24 février 2012, Association France Palestine Solidarité http://www.france-palestine.org (France)
• Colloque universitaire international
Collectif Palestine Paris 8 - Saint-Denis 93, lundi 27 février 2012
• Colloque universitaire international
Collectif Palestine Paris 8 - Saint-Denis 93, lundi 27 février 2012, mardi 28 février 2012
• Conférence " l’identité Palestinienne" présentée par une jeune palestinienne de Jéru-salem, étudiante à sciences Po Paris.
AFPS Savoie - Chambéry 73, mercredi 29 février 2012
• Rassemblement silencieux
Les Femmes en noir - Chambéry 73, vendredi 2 mars 2012
• Projection, Débat "Jaffa, la mécanique de l’orange"
Collectif Vaucluse pour une Paix Juste et Durable entre Palestiniens et Israéliens…Avignon (84), vendredi 2 mars 2012
• Conférence sur le Tribunal Russel pour la Palestine
Palestine 33 et UJFP - Talence 33, lundi 5 mars 2012
• Colloque universitaire international
Collectif Palestine Paris 8 - Saint-Denis 93, lundi 27 février 2012
• Colloque universitaire international
Collectif Palestine Paris 8 - Saint-Denis 93, lundi 27 février 2012, mardi 28 février 2012
• Conférence " l’identité Palestinienne" présentée par une jeune palestinienne de Jéru-salem, étudiante à sciences Po Paris.
AFPS Savoie - Chambéry 73, mercredi 29 février 2012
• Rassemblement silencieux
Les Femmes en noir - Chambéry 73, vendredi 2 mars 2012
• Projection, Débat "Jaffa, la mécanique de l’orange"
Collectif Vaucluse pour une Paix Juste et Durable entre Palestiniens et Israéliens…Avignon (84), vendredi 2 mars 2012
• Conférence sur le Tribunal Russel pour la Palestine
Palestine 33 et UJFP - Talence 33, lundi 5 mars 2012
Settler Extremists Provoke Violence, Threaten Muslim Sovereignty Over Temple Mount, Seeking Final Day of Reckoning
22 February 2012, Tikun Olam-תיקון עולם http://www.richardsilverstein.com (USA)
Over the past week or so there have been some strange doings on Jerusalem’s Temple Mount. As the lyrics of the old song go:
There’s something happnin’ here
What it is ain’t exactly clear
There’s a man with a gun over there
Telling me I’ve go to beware
It appears that a growing band of Israeli messianic settlers have banded together to orchestrate a crisis on the Temple Mount. Their ultimate goal seems to be taking Jewish control over the sacred ground, including two of the holiest sites in Islam, the Dome of the Rock and Al-Aqsa Mosque.
For many years, there have been radical settler groups preparing for such a day. Ateret Cohanim maintains a yeshiva which is training priests to resume the Temple rituals including animal sacrifice. Dov Hikind’s wife earns $150,000 a year as its U.S. fundraiser. They’re also breeding cattle in the hopes of find that miraculous red heifer which would serve as a sign that God is ready to resume Jewish rites on this sacred ground.
The settlers know that for Jews to rebuild the Temple would mean a holy war in the Holy Land that would likely dwarf the Crusades for passion and bloodletting. For these Jews, such an eventuality would bring the days of the coming of the Messiah closer, thus making the human suffering not just acceptable, but even desirable.
These Temple activists are also fundraising on behalf of their messianic Armageddon. Here, they’re raising $10,000 to preserve “Jewish rights” on the Temple Mount. The website says there is no written budget because the uses to which the funding would be put would be “sensitive.” Therefore such documentation is for “internal” purposes only. You can imagine what this means. They’re likely raising a lot of their funding from the types of American Jews giving to the Hebron Fund and Central Fund of Israel.
There is a political echelon in the radical settler movement which is preparing the ground for such a Jewish takeover. It’s led by Moshe Feiglin, who recently took nearly a quarter of the vote in the Likud leadership primary by running to the right of (!) Bibi Netanyahu. Flyers were publicly posted throughout Jerusalem two weeks ago calling for Jews to make aliyah en masse to the Temple Mount. The term aliyah in the Temple context is a historic term used to denote Jewish pilgrims who went to the sacred spot for worship on Jewish festivals. In other words, it would only be used today by someone who saw himself as commanded to rebuild and renew Jewish worship there. To do this, one must first evict or destroy the Muslim holy sites there as was done by Hindu nationalists to a mosque in Ayodiyah, India.
The extremist site, The Temple Mount is Ours, calls for a mass pilgrimage ”in order to strengthen claim of Jewish sovereignty” to the site. You can see in the video above from February 19th and this one what is the result of such settler provocation. The last time such a thing was attempted, Ariel Sharon instigated the Second Intifada and propelled himself into the prime minister’s chair. Feiglin is smart enough to understand that such political grandstanding can be the making of an Israeli prime minister.
But he’s also smart enough to understand that by identifying himself too explicitly with this movement he could get himself investigated by the police and possibly jailed. So he deftly denied credit for the flyer and made his own visit to the Temple Mount earlier than the time specified in the flyer.
A Feiglin associate in this interview posted by IMRA denies that the founder of the Manhigut Yehudit ["Jewish Leadership"] movement wants to rebuild the Temple. Instead, he claims Feiglin only wants to prepare the Jews for the moment when the Messiah will come and accomplish this task. I’m afraid this sort of nuance is justifiably lost of Muslims who mistake a Jew who wants to lay the groundwork for stealing their holy site from them, with a Jewish Messiah who will actually do this. Feiglin’s representative rather ominously states in the interview that it’s the founders’ dream to “make” all Jews share in his vision, and that this is what will bring the Messiah and a rebuilt Temple.
Strangely, the representative of Feiglin’s group adamantly maintained that it had no obligation to publicly renounce the flyer. Further, he said it had no plans to file a complaint with the police about the document it claims was a fraud. This is generally diametrically opposite from the way most political parties operate in Israel. In similar circumstances, they would file a complaint and ask the police to investigate in order to clarify to the public their rejection of the message and the act of fraud. The fact that Manhifut Yehudit behaved so differently in this case raises major questions about its relationship to the flyer and those who created it.
The settler agitators are camouflaging their covert campaign for Jewish sovereignty, couching it in terms of religious liberty. No one, they seem to think, can reject a call for Jews to have the same access to the Temple Mount that Muslims enjoy. The only problem with this notion is that Muslims for generations have controlled the area. Until the type of agitation initiated by Sharon, access was relatively open. In fact, I can remember visiting both holy mosques during my stays in Israel in 1972-73 and 1979-1980. It was only after Muslims became afraid that Jews wanted to take control from them that relations went bad.
There will be some among you who will say: C’mon. You’re making a mountain out of a molehill. Feiglin barely has a following. Hardly anyone takes him seriously. He leads a bunch of radical kooks. No Israeli in their right mind would come anywhere near these cockamamie ideas.
That’s all well and good. But I’m not buying. History is full of examples of kooks whose ideas began by being spurned by the mainstream, until they weren’t. While this will agitate some of our friends, remember Hitler’s beer hall putsch in 1923? What did they think of him then? Crackpot, right? Threw him in jail, where he proceeded to write Mein Kampf and plan his takeover of the German state.
OK, so you don’t like that analogy. How about one closer to home? In 1967, Israel conquered the West Bank and reunited Jerusalem after the War. On Passover 1968, Rabbi Moshe Levinger held his first Passover seder in Hebron. There were no settlements then. The Greater Land of Israel was only a gleam in his eye. But every great movement begins with a small spark. And from that spark comes a terrible conflagration.
After that Seder, the messianic nationalists who founded Gush Emunim provoked a crisis. Instead of waiting for government approval, they re-established the Gush Etzion settlement which had been destroyed by the Jordanians in 1948. This had been one of the more traumatic incidents of the war in which a group of Jews had been slaughtered by the Arab army in the battle for Jerusalem. While Levinger’s re-occupation of the Etzion bloc on behalf of Israel was an enormously popular nationalist statement, it also ignited the decades of hate and mistrust that have inflamed relations with the Palestinians ever since.
Later in 1975, Gush Emunim organized the aliyah to Sebastia, where they created a new settlement, Elon Moreh. After numberous attempts were rebuffed by the IDF, the Israeli government in the form of Shimon Peres, signed an agreement legalizing the new settlement, which in turn opened the floodgates for the massive expropriations and settlement growth that followed. This was the first example of government capitulation to the settler movement and was the model the movement used in all its subsequent confrontations.
This is the history of the settler enterprise. They begin with an inch, and within a year or a decade they’ve taken not just a mile, but an entire city or nation. But they recognize that in the case of the Temple Mount they are dealing with an even more sensitive subject. One that has no national consensus as the settlement enterprise perhaps did in 1967.
National polls show that while Israeli Jews overwhelming want to rebuild the Holy Temple, only 30% are willing to see the government take active steps to do so. In other words, while most Israelis harbor vague religious hankerings to restore the glory of the Holy Temple in Jerusalem. Most realize that to do so would start a religious war the likes of which the region hasn’t seen for centuries. In fact, in this report Jordan, which is nominally responsible for the Muslim holy places in Jerusalem warns Israel not to attempt to change the status quo or risk grave consequences.
So the settlers must mount a carefully calibrated campaign to achieve their goal. It must start with small incremental steps that lead to larger ones. One of these is the call for full Jewish access to the sacred confines of the Temple Mount. To dramatize this, they’ve enlisted the willing help of their U.S. Jewish water carriers, the Zionist Organization of America. ZOA put out a bizarre press release calling for all the mainstream American Jewish groups to take up this cause of religious liberty by criticizing the Israeli government for its supposedly high-handed tactics in denying Jews access:
The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) believes that unfettered access and freedom to pray at a holy site is a basic, universally recognized right, which certainly should be accorded to Jews in the Jewish State of Israel…Yet, Israeli police and security personnel, hoping to appease Muslim extremists including the Wakf authority on the Temple Mount, have been engaging in blatantly discriminatory and humiliating behavior toward Jewish visitors.
…The ZOA strongly urges the ADL, AJ Committee, the Orthodox Union, Emunah, AMIT, RZA and other groups to work to end bias and discrimination on the Temple Mount against identified Jews.
The group is playing the role of key interlocutor among American Jews on behalf of settler extremism. They published this press release in coordination with the flyer I mentioned above which called for a mass rally to the Mount:
…[To] purify this place of the enemies of Israel, thieves of [Holy] lands, in order to rebuild the Holy Temple on the ruins of [their] mosques
The flyer was so egregious, so incendiary that police immediately cancelled access to the site for Jews and blamed Moshe Feiglin for provoking the hysteria. As soon as Feiglin denied responsibility for the flyer, ZOA immediately took down its press release, only to republish it four days later, after the incident had blown over.
The press release and accompanying rhetoric pulls out all the guilt-inducing stops in the Jewish conscience. It accuses Israeli police, responsible for determining who and how many Jews will enter the Temple confines, with organizing “selektzias,” (the Nazi term for lining up concentration camp inmates to determine who would live and who would die) in which they line up Jews before entering the Muslim sacred grounds. Note below how the ZOA both inappropriately exploits Holocaust rhetoric and shamelessly excuses the offense at the same time:
Identified Jews are shunted to the side to wait separately in what some have come to cynically call “the selekzia,” alluding to the Nazis’ orderly process of deciding which Jews would live and which Jews would go to their demise. [While ZOA does not condone inappropriate use of Holocaust imagery, especially in matters relating to Israel, it is telling that Jews subjected to systematic abuse on the Temple Mount would even contemplate using this term.]
The ZOA claimed police were looking for “Jewish traits” in determining who could enter and who couldn’t:
Identifiably Jewish visitors to the Temple Mount are singled out for biased treatment…Remarkably, if your appearance or behavior openly shows you are a Muslim you are treated with respect [!]
All of this is meant to conjure up the Holocaust in Jewish consciousness in much the same way that settlers evacuated from Gush Katif wore orange armbands with Jewish stars that denoted they were being treated by the Israeli police and IDF the same as Jews sent to the gas chambers during World War II.
The press release also exhibits historical amnesia by erasing past incidents of Jewish and non-Jewish terror associated with the holy site contested by two major religions:
There is no security basis for targeting Jews on the Temple Mount…
Overall, this is a tremendously effective bit of political-religious theater in an Israel context. The secular government has little response to it other than invoking its own civil authority, which isn’t a very resonant concept when compared with the Holocaust. That is why the settlers have vanquished the secular authorities at every turn and all but dominated the political realm.
The current campaign for the right of Jews to freely access the Temple Mount is two-pronged. There’s a grassroots cadre who agitate on the spot by lining up and demanding physical access. Their efforts have been successful at causing serious rioting over the past few days which involved Israeli police invading the sacred confines of the mosques. This, of course, is a severe breach of the sanctity of the place, all of which the settlers want.
Israeli police official testifies before Knesset committee on Temple Mount Jewish access
The grassroots element is supported by an official political effort backed by far-right Knesset members. Members of the Interior Committee in fact, have dragged before them the senior Israeli police officer responsible for maintaining order on the Mount. They publicly excoriated him for the demeaning treatment he’s allegedly offered Jewish Temple visitors. All this serves as a pincers movement against the civil authorities. They’re beset on the one side by the activists in the street and on the other by the political leaders demanding the government take their hands off these poor Jews doing nothing worse than demanding their God-given right to visit the Holy Temple.
But given the history since 1967, we know where this will lead. The police will eventually back off. The settlers will become more provocative and brazen. Confrontations will become more violent and more frequent. Till there is some sort of defining catastrophic moment.
In 1984, the Jewish Underground attempted to foment such a crisis by bombing the Mount and destroying the mosques. Fortunately, the conspiracy was exposed and the members arrested before they could carry out their plans. Of those arrested, most were eventually pardoned, which again shows the impotence of civil authority in the face of the religious zeal of the settler movement.
We don’t know what the settlers have in mind to provoke such a crisis this time around. But the angrier they can make the Muslims in Jerusalem, the more violence they can provoke, the closer will come the Final Day of Reckoning.
Let any who dismiss this as a far-fetched fantasy beware. Such fantasies have a way of becoming not just reality, but nightmare reality in the pathological hot-house environment of the Middle East.
Over the past week or so there have been some strange doings on Jerusalem’s Temple Mount. As the lyrics of the old song go:
There’s something happnin’ here
What it is ain’t exactly clear
There’s a man with a gun over there
Telling me I’ve go to beware
It appears that a growing band of Israeli messianic settlers have banded together to orchestrate a crisis on the Temple Mount. Their ultimate goal seems to be taking Jewish control over the sacred ground, including two of the holiest sites in Islam, the Dome of the Rock and Al-Aqsa Mosque.
For many years, there have been radical settler groups preparing for such a day. Ateret Cohanim maintains a yeshiva which is training priests to resume the Temple rituals including animal sacrifice. Dov Hikind’s wife earns $150,000 a year as its U.S. fundraiser. They’re also breeding cattle in the hopes of find that miraculous red heifer which would serve as a sign that God is ready to resume Jewish rites on this sacred ground.
The settlers know that for Jews to rebuild the Temple would mean a holy war in the Holy Land that would likely dwarf the Crusades for passion and bloodletting. For these Jews, such an eventuality would bring the days of the coming of the Messiah closer, thus making the human suffering not just acceptable, but even desirable.
These Temple activists are also fundraising on behalf of their messianic Armageddon. Here, they’re raising $10,000 to preserve “Jewish rights” on the Temple Mount. The website says there is no written budget because the uses to which the funding would be put would be “sensitive.” Therefore such documentation is for “internal” purposes only. You can imagine what this means. They’re likely raising a lot of their funding from the types of American Jews giving to the Hebron Fund and Central Fund of Israel.
There is a political echelon in the radical settler movement which is preparing the ground for such a Jewish takeover. It’s led by Moshe Feiglin, who recently took nearly a quarter of the vote in the Likud leadership primary by running to the right of (!) Bibi Netanyahu. Flyers were publicly posted throughout Jerusalem two weeks ago calling for Jews to make aliyah en masse to the Temple Mount. The term aliyah in the Temple context is a historic term used to denote Jewish pilgrims who went to the sacred spot for worship on Jewish festivals. In other words, it would only be used today by someone who saw himself as commanded to rebuild and renew Jewish worship there. To do this, one must first evict or destroy the Muslim holy sites there as was done by Hindu nationalists to a mosque in Ayodiyah, India.
The extremist site, The Temple Mount is Ours, calls for a mass pilgrimage ”in order to strengthen claim of Jewish sovereignty” to the site. You can see in the video above from February 19th and this one what is the result of such settler provocation. The last time such a thing was attempted, Ariel Sharon instigated the Second Intifada and propelled himself into the prime minister’s chair. Feiglin is smart enough to understand that such political grandstanding can be the making of an Israeli prime minister.
But he’s also smart enough to understand that by identifying himself too explicitly with this movement he could get himself investigated by the police and possibly jailed. So he deftly denied credit for the flyer and made his own visit to the Temple Mount earlier than the time specified in the flyer.
A Feiglin associate in this interview posted by IMRA denies that the founder of the Manhigut Yehudit ["Jewish Leadership"] movement wants to rebuild the Temple. Instead, he claims Feiglin only wants to prepare the Jews for the moment when the Messiah will come and accomplish this task. I’m afraid this sort of nuance is justifiably lost of Muslims who mistake a Jew who wants to lay the groundwork for stealing their holy site from them, with a Jewish Messiah who will actually do this. Feiglin’s representative rather ominously states in the interview that it’s the founders’ dream to “make” all Jews share in his vision, and that this is what will bring the Messiah and a rebuilt Temple.
Strangely, the representative of Feiglin’s group adamantly maintained that it had no obligation to publicly renounce the flyer. Further, he said it had no plans to file a complaint with the police about the document it claims was a fraud. This is generally diametrically opposite from the way most political parties operate in Israel. In similar circumstances, they would file a complaint and ask the police to investigate in order to clarify to the public their rejection of the message and the act of fraud. The fact that Manhifut Yehudit behaved so differently in this case raises major questions about its relationship to the flyer and those who created it.
The settler agitators are camouflaging their covert campaign for Jewish sovereignty, couching it in terms of religious liberty. No one, they seem to think, can reject a call for Jews to have the same access to the Temple Mount that Muslims enjoy. The only problem with this notion is that Muslims for generations have controlled the area. Until the type of agitation initiated by Sharon, access was relatively open. In fact, I can remember visiting both holy mosques during my stays in Israel in 1972-73 and 1979-1980. It was only after Muslims became afraid that Jews wanted to take control from them that relations went bad.
There will be some among you who will say: C’mon. You’re making a mountain out of a molehill. Feiglin barely has a following. Hardly anyone takes him seriously. He leads a bunch of radical kooks. No Israeli in their right mind would come anywhere near these cockamamie ideas.
That’s all well and good. But I’m not buying. History is full of examples of kooks whose ideas began by being spurned by the mainstream, until they weren’t. While this will agitate some of our friends, remember Hitler’s beer hall putsch in 1923? What did they think of him then? Crackpot, right? Threw him in jail, where he proceeded to write Mein Kampf and plan his takeover of the German state.
OK, so you don’t like that analogy. How about one closer to home? In 1967, Israel conquered the West Bank and reunited Jerusalem after the War. On Passover 1968, Rabbi Moshe Levinger held his first Passover seder in Hebron. There were no settlements then. The Greater Land of Israel was only a gleam in his eye. But every great movement begins with a small spark. And from that spark comes a terrible conflagration.
After that Seder, the messianic nationalists who founded Gush Emunim provoked a crisis. Instead of waiting for government approval, they re-established the Gush Etzion settlement which had been destroyed by the Jordanians in 1948. This had been one of the more traumatic incidents of the war in which a group of Jews had been slaughtered by the Arab army in the battle for Jerusalem. While Levinger’s re-occupation of the Etzion bloc on behalf of Israel was an enormously popular nationalist statement, it also ignited the decades of hate and mistrust that have inflamed relations with the Palestinians ever since.
Later in 1975, Gush Emunim organized the aliyah to Sebastia, where they created a new settlement, Elon Moreh. After numberous attempts were rebuffed by the IDF, the Israeli government in the form of Shimon Peres, signed an agreement legalizing the new settlement, which in turn opened the floodgates for the massive expropriations and settlement growth that followed. This was the first example of government capitulation to the settler movement and was the model the movement used in all its subsequent confrontations.
This is the history of the settler enterprise. They begin with an inch, and within a year or a decade they’ve taken not just a mile, but an entire city or nation. But they recognize that in the case of the Temple Mount they are dealing with an even more sensitive subject. One that has no national consensus as the settlement enterprise perhaps did in 1967.
National polls show that while Israeli Jews overwhelming want to rebuild the Holy Temple, only 30% are willing to see the government take active steps to do so. In other words, while most Israelis harbor vague religious hankerings to restore the glory of the Holy Temple in Jerusalem. Most realize that to do so would start a religious war the likes of which the region hasn’t seen for centuries. In fact, in this report Jordan, which is nominally responsible for the Muslim holy places in Jerusalem warns Israel not to attempt to change the status quo or risk grave consequences.
So the settlers must mount a carefully calibrated campaign to achieve their goal. It must start with small incremental steps that lead to larger ones. One of these is the call for full Jewish access to the sacred confines of the Temple Mount. To dramatize this, they’ve enlisted the willing help of their U.S. Jewish water carriers, the Zionist Organization of America. ZOA put out a bizarre press release calling for all the mainstream American Jewish groups to take up this cause of religious liberty by criticizing the Israeli government for its supposedly high-handed tactics in denying Jews access:
The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) believes that unfettered access and freedom to pray at a holy site is a basic, universally recognized right, which certainly should be accorded to Jews in the Jewish State of Israel…Yet, Israeli police and security personnel, hoping to appease Muslim extremists including the Wakf authority on the Temple Mount, have been engaging in blatantly discriminatory and humiliating behavior toward Jewish visitors.
…The ZOA strongly urges the ADL, AJ Committee, the Orthodox Union, Emunah, AMIT, RZA and other groups to work to end bias and discrimination on the Temple Mount against identified Jews.
The group is playing the role of key interlocutor among American Jews on behalf of settler extremism. They published this press release in coordination with the flyer I mentioned above which called for a mass rally to the Mount:
…[To] purify this place of the enemies of Israel, thieves of [Holy] lands, in order to rebuild the Holy Temple on the ruins of [their] mosques
The flyer was so egregious, so incendiary that police immediately cancelled access to the site for Jews and blamed Moshe Feiglin for provoking the hysteria. As soon as Feiglin denied responsibility for the flyer, ZOA immediately took down its press release, only to republish it four days later, after the incident had blown over.
The press release and accompanying rhetoric pulls out all the guilt-inducing stops in the Jewish conscience. It accuses Israeli police, responsible for determining who and how many Jews will enter the Temple confines, with organizing “selektzias,” (the Nazi term for lining up concentration camp inmates to determine who would live and who would die) in which they line up Jews before entering the Muslim sacred grounds. Note below how the ZOA both inappropriately exploits Holocaust rhetoric and shamelessly excuses the offense at the same time:
Identified Jews are shunted to the side to wait separately in what some have come to cynically call “the selekzia,” alluding to the Nazis’ orderly process of deciding which Jews would live and which Jews would go to their demise. [While ZOA does not condone inappropriate use of Holocaust imagery, especially in matters relating to Israel, it is telling that Jews subjected to systematic abuse on the Temple Mount would even contemplate using this term.]
The ZOA claimed police were looking for “Jewish traits” in determining who could enter and who couldn’t:
Identifiably Jewish visitors to the Temple Mount are singled out for biased treatment…Remarkably, if your appearance or behavior openly shows you are a Muslim you are treated with respect [!]
All of this is meant to conjure up the Holocaust in Jewish consciousness in much the same way that settlers evacuated from Gush Katif wore orange armbands with Jewish stars that denoted they were being treated by the Israeli police and IDF the same as Jews sent to the gas chambers during World War II.
The press release also exhibits historical amnesia by erasing past incidents of Jewish and non-Jewish terror associated with the holy site contested by two major religions:
There is no security basis for targeting Jews on the Temple Mount…
Overall, this is a tremendously effective bit of political-religious theater in an Israel context. The secular government has little response to it other than invoking its own civil authority, which isn’t a very resonant concept when compared with the Holocaust. That is why the settlers have vanquished the secular authorities at every turn and all but dominated the political realm.
The current campaign for the right of Jews to freely access the Temple Mount is two-pronged. There’s a grassroots cadre who agitate on the spot by lining up and demanding physical access. Their efforts have been successful at causing serious rioting over the past few days which involved Israeli police invading the sacred confines of the mosques. This, of course, is a severe breach of the sanctity of the place, all of which the settlers want.
Israeli police official testifies before Knesset committee on Temple Mount Jewish access
The grassroots element is supported by an official political effort backed by far-right Knesset members. Members of the Interior Committee in fact, have dragged before them the senior Israeli police officer responsible for maintaining order on the Mount. They publicly excoriated him for the demeaning treatment he’s allegedly offered Jewish Temple visitors. All this serves as a pincers movement against the civil authorities. They’re beset on the one side by the activists in the street and on the other by the political leaders demanding the government take their hands off these poor Jews doing nothing worse than demanding their God-given right to visit the Holy Temple.
But given the history since 1967, we know where this will lead. The police will eventually back off. The settlers will become more provocative and brazen. Confrontations will become more violent and more frequent. Till there is some sort of defining catastrophic moment.
In 1984, the Jewish Underground attempted to foment such a crisis by bombing the Mount and destroying the mosques. Fortunately, the conspiracy was exposed and the members arrested before they could carry out their plans. Of those arrested, most were eventually pardoned, which again shows the impotence of civil authority in the face of the religious zeal of the settler movement.
We don’t know what the settlers have in mind to provoke such a crisis this time around. But the angrier they can make the Muslims in Jerusalem, the more violence they can provoke, the closer will come the Final Day of Reckoning.
Let any who dismiss this as a far-fetched fantasy beware. Such fantasies have a way of becoming not just reality, but nightmare reality in the pathological hot-house environment of the Middle East.
On 1st Anniversary in Israeli Prison, Abusisi Charges Mossad Spirited Him from Ukraine in Coffin
21 February 2012, Tikun Olam-תיקון עולם http://www.richardsilverstein.com (USA)
Drawing of Abusisi and his children
Dirar Abusisi has just completed his first anniversary as an Israeli prisoner of conscience incarcerated for “crimes” he hasn’t committed and jailed without trial. He’s been offered deals by the State involving confession to charges without foundation, which would involve accepting as long as a nine-year jail sentence (remember the fate of Ameer Makhoul and Anat Kamm?). In prison, he’s suffered kidney stones, high blood pressure, heart problems and lost 60 pounds. Israel has refused him an operation to relieve the pain suffered from the kidney stones.
A fellow Palestinian prisoner who was housed next door to Abusisi and with whom he shared his ordeal, told his story (Arabic) to the Palestinian newspaper, Al Shehab. The prisoner was released as part of the Gilad Shalit prisoner exchange. Here is an excerpt translated from the story:
[After being detained in the Ukrainian railroad car] Dirar found himself in Kiev, bound and blindfolded. He was taken out of the car and into a villa, where he was surprised to see seven officers who did not have Ukrainian features. One of them spoke to him in Arabic, and said, “Do you know who we are? We are Israeli intelligence.”
Abu Sisi was tied in a chair, and at the beginning of the interrogation was surprised that Yoram Cohen, head of the Shin Bet, and Maj. Oscar “the dirty investigator” [ed., for more on his interrogation "skills" see pgs 35-41 of this affidavit by the Public Committee to Stop Torture in Israel] as described by prisoners in Ashkelon [prison], and those of other military ranks. They interrogated him about [Gilad] Shalit and his relationship with Al-Qassam [Hamas' military wing].
… Abusisi said “It was torture, and brutal, I was strongly beaten on the chest, and received several sharp, hard slaps on the face. I could hear voices screaming and moaning. This lasted 5-6 hours in my estimation.”
Abu Sissi was left alone in the torture chamber and afterward, a man came who bound and blindfolded him again, put him in a coffin and nailed it shut, speaking about how he was transferred to the airport in Kiev…
[After arrival in Israel] Abu Sisi was transferred to “Petah Tikva,” an Israeli detention center.
Then Yoram Cohen returned again for interrogation along with Amos Gilad, who was responsible for the Shalit security file. Then the torture was repeated.
This account has not been verified for accuracy. There are a few aspects that might be questionable, such as the claim that Yoram Cohen, then deputy chief of the Shin Bet, traveled to Ukraine to interrogate Abusisi. It would be more characteristic for the Mossad to be involved in such a case outside Israeli territory. But I have learned never to underestimate the powers of mischief of which such intelligence operatives are capable.
Also, let us not forget the extraordinary fortitude and sacrifice by Khader Adnan, who is now in his 65th day of a fast till death to protest the Israeli justice system, which has not offered any charges against him nor brought him to trial.
Dirar Abusisi has just completed his first anniversary as an Israeli prisoner of conscience incarcerated for “crimes” he hasn’t committed and jailed without trial. He’s been offered deals by the State involving confession to charges without foundation, which would involve accepting as long as a nine-year jail sentence (remember the fate of Ameer Makhoul and Anat Kamm?). In prison, he’s suffered kidney stones, high blood pressure, heart problems and lost 60 pounds. Israel has refused him an operation to relieve the pain suffered from the kidney stones.
A fellow Palestinian prisoner who was housed next door to Abusisi and with whom he shared his ordeal, told his story (Arabic) to the Palestinian newspaper, Al Shehab. The prisoner was released as part of the Gilad Shalit prisoner exchange. Here is an excerpt translated from the story:
[After being detained in the Ukrainian railroad car] Dirar found himself in Kiev, bound and blindfolded. He was taken out of the car and into a villa, where he was surprised to see seven officers who did not have Ukrainian features. One of them spoke to him in Arabic, and said, “Do you know who we are? We are Israeli intelligence.”
Abu Sisi was tied in a chair, and at the beginning of the interrogation was surprised that Yoram Cohen, head of the Shin Bet, and Maj. Oscar “the dirty investigator” [ed., for more on his interrogation "skills" see pgs 35-41 of this affidavit by the Public Committee to Stop Torture in Israel] as described by prisoners in Ashkelon [prison], and those of other military ranks. They interrogated him about [Gilad] Shalit and his relationship with Al-Qassam [Hamas' military wing].
… Abusisi said “It was torture, and brutal, I was strongly beaten on the chest, and received several sharp, hard slaps on the face. I could hear voices screaming and moaning. This lasted 5-6 hours in my estimation.”
Abu Sissi was left alone in the torture chamber and afterward, a man came who bound and blindfolded him again, put him in a coffin and nailed it shut, speaking about how he was transferred to the airport in Kiev…
[After arrival in Israel] Abu Sisi was transferred to “Petah Tikva,” an Israeli detention center.
Then Yoram Cohen returned again for interrogation along with Amos Gilad, who was responsible for the Shalit security file. Then the torture was repeated.
This account has not been verified for accuracy. There are a few aspects that might be questionable, such as the claim that Yoram Cohen, then deputy chief of the Shin Bet, traveled to Ukraine to interrogate Abusisi. It would be more characteristic for the Mossad to be involved in such a case outside Israeli territory. But I have learned never to underestimate the powers of mischief of which such intelligence operatives are capable.
Also, let us not forget the extraordinary fortitude and sacrifice by Khader Adnan, who is now in his 65th day of a fast till death to protest the Israeli justice system, which has not offered any charges against him nor brought him to trial.
quinta-feira, 23 de fevereiro de 2012
Noam Chomsky: “Israel es la amenaza más importante para la seguridad mundial”
23 febrero 2012, LibreRed.net http://www.librered.net
El lingüista y analista político norteamericano Noam Chomsky ha criticado las alegaciones de EEUU sobre el programa energético de carácter nuclear de Irán, a la vez que ha calificado a Israel como “la amenaza más importante para la seguridad mundial”.
En un artículo publicado el miércoles en el diario británico The Guardian, Chomsky ha enfatizado que la doctrina estratégica de Irán es defensiva y ha sido diseñada para disuadir cualquiera invasión contra su integridad territorial.
En este sentido, el famoso escritor ha puesto de relieve que pese a las propagandas anti-iraníes lanzadas por los políticos occidentales, los resultados de las encuestas realizadas en Europa demuestran que los encuestados consideran a Israel como una amenaza para la paz del Oriente Medio y el Norte de África.
“Antes de las masivas campañas propagandísticas de los últimos años en EEUU, la mayoría de los ciudadanos [estadounidenses], como la mayoría de las naciones del mundo, creían que Irán, en calidad del signatario del Tratado de No Proliferación (TNP), tiene el derecho de llevar a cabo el enriquecimiento de uranio, e incluso, hoy en día, una gran mayoría [del pueblo del mundo] enfatiza en las soluciones pacíficas para el programa nuclear de Irán”, ha subrayado.
De acuerdo con el politólogo norteamericano, Washington y Tel Aviv han extendido una ola de “Iranofobia”, puesto que temen la extensión de la influencia del país persa en la región, especialmente, en sus vecinos como Irak y Afganistán.
EEUU, Israel (poseedor de unas 200 ojivas nucleares) y algunos de sus aliados acusan a Irán de intentar desarrollar tecnología nuclear con fines militares y utilizan este pretexto para que impongan sanciones internacionales y unilaterales contra el país persa.
Por su parte, Irán, en calidad de Estado miembro de la AIEA y signatario del TNP, además de rechazar de forma rotunda tales acusaciones,defiende su derecho soberano a desarrollar tecnología nuclear con fines pacíficos .
El lingüista y analista político norteamericano Noam Chomsky ha criticado las alegaciones de EEUU sobre el programa energético de carácter nuclear de Irán, a la vez que ha calificado a Israel como “la amenaza más importante para la seguridad mundial”.
En un artículo publicado el miércoles en el diario británico The Guardian, Chomsky ha enfatizado que la doctrina estratégica de Irán es defensiva y ha sido diseñada para disuadir cualquiera invasión contra su integridad territorial.
En este sentido, el famoso escritor ha puesto de relieve que pese a las propagandas anti-iraníes lanzadas por los políticos occidentales, los resultados de las encuestas realizadas en Europa demuestran que los encuestados consideran a Israel como una amenaza para la paz del Oriente Medio y el Norte de África.
“Antes de las masivas campañas propagandísticas de los últimos años en EEUU, la mayoría de los ciudadanos [estadounidenses], como la mayoría de las naciones del mundo, creían que Irán, en calidad del signatario del Tratado de No Proliferación (TNP), tiene el derecho de llevar a cabo el enriquecimiento de uranio, e incluso, hoy en día, una gran mayoría [del pueblo del mundo] enfatiza en las soluciones pacíficas para el programa nuclear de Irán”, ha subrayado.
De acuerdo con el politólogo norteamericano, Washington y Tel Aviv han extendido una ola de “Iranofobia”, puesto que temen la extensión de la influencia del país persa en la región, especialmente, en sus vecinos como Irak y Afganistán.
EEUU, Israel (poseedor de unas 200 ojivas nucleares) y algunos de sus aliados acusan a Irán de intentar desarrollar tecnología nuclear con fines militares y utilizan este pretexto para que impongan sanciones internacionales y unilaterales contra el país persa.
Por su parte, Irán, en calidad de Estado miembro de la AIEA y signatario del TNP, además de rechazar de forma rotunda tales acusaciones,defiende su derecho soberano a desarrollar tecnología nuclear con fines pacíficos .
quarta-feira, 22 de fevereiro de 2012
Colonisation israélienne à Jérusalem-Est : les consuls généraux des 27 pays de l’UE dans la ville occupée appellent à l’action
21 février 2012 Association France Palestine Solidarité http://www.france-palestine.org (France)
Olivia Elias
Groupe de travail BDS de l’AFPS
Comme chaque année, les consuls généraux des 27 pays de l’UE à Jérusalem ont publié un rapport sur la situation dans la ville occupée. Face « à la détérioration sur le terrain », ils affirment qu’il est « de plus en plus urgent d’intervenir » pour « préserver le tissu social politique, culturel et économique palestinien à Jérusalem-Est ». Dans la perspective « de maintenir la possibilité de la solution de deux Etats, confor¬mément aux nombreuses résolutions de l’UE », ils recommandent à celle-ci et aux Etats membres l’application de 26 mesures. Celles-ci sont énumérées dans l’Annexe 2 du rapport sous le titre « Renforcer la politique de l’UE à l’égard de Jérusalem-Est » [1]
Les consuls ne se sont pas contentés d’avancer de vagues préconisations à caractère général – même s’il y en a. Dans la partie A, ils ont formulé 6 recommandations concrètes qui concernent le volet « Désinvestissement » du programme BDS de l’AFPS ainsi que le volet « Boycott des produits des colonies ».
Recommandations concernant les produits des colonies : R 9 et 10 de la partie A
Recommandation concernant des services (le tou¬risme fait partie des services) : R 8
Désinvestissement : R 6, 7 et 11.
On remarquera que les consuls veulent « S’assurer que les produits fabriqués dans les colonies de Jérusalem-Est ne bénéficient pas du traitement préférentiel accordé dans le cadre de l’accord commercial UE/Israël » (R 9) ; ce qui nous fait immédiatement penser à Sodastream, fabriqué à Mishor Adumim, colonie du « grand Jéru¬salem ». Certes, les diplomates euro¬péens ne parlent pas de boycott et encore moins de sus¬pension de l’accord d’association UE-Israël ou d’embargo sur les pro¬duits des colonies comme le réclame l’Afps. C’est clair. Mais ils ajoutent « Sensibiliser davantage le public quant à l’origine de ces pro¬duits, notamment en élaborant des directives au sujet de leur étiquetage à l’intention des acteurs euro¬péens majeurs du secteur de la distribution » (R 10).
En langage diplo¬ma¬tique, les consuls disent « Il faut sensibiliser les gens pour qu’ils connaissent bien l’origine des pro¬duits qu’ils achètent et qu’ils puissent décider, en connais¬sance de cause, s’ils veulent acheter un produit fabriqué dans une colonie ou non ». C’est quand même une façon de reconnaître qu’il y a un problème avec ces pro¬duits et que ceux/celles qui désirent dis¬poser d’informations fiables avant d’acheter ou non ont raison. Surtout si l’on garde à l’esprit le fait suivant : leurs recommandations ont été précédées d’un long rapport sur les avancées et les ravages de la colonisation à Jérusalem-Est et la tonalité générale du document ainsi que de l’annexe est la volonté politique de mettre fin à ce processus illégal d’annexion.
La prise de position des consuls généraux conforte la légitimité de nos actions. Comment pourrait-on interdire, à nous citoyens, de manifester devant les grandes surfaces et magasins Darty et les boutiques Sephora qui trompent sur l’origine des gazéi¬fi¬ca¬teurs Sodastream / SodaClub et des produits de beauté Ahava ? Et comment s’opposer à des manifestations devant les boutiques Orange alors que France Télécom-Orange a conclu un partenariat avec Partner, un opérateur israélien de téléphonie mobile impliqué dans la colonisation ? Faudrait-il poursuivre les consuls généraux ?
Cela dit, il est certain que toutes les mesures préconisées ne revêtent pas la même importance et que l’on peut critiquer certaines d’entre elles et même formuler de très sérieuses objections à d’autres. Par exemple, la référence à la Feuille de route, bel et bien périmée et dépassée, ou la collaboration avec le Quartet, instance notoirement inefficace et dont la partialité a été dénoncée par de hauts responsables palestiniens.
Il n’empêche! Il convient de saluer la prise de position des consuls généraux. Dans leur rapport 2011, ceux-ci affirment : « Il faut passer aux actes » en faisant un pas en avant par rapport à 2010. Ils invitent, en effet, la Com¬mission « à réfléchir à une proposition de législation euro-péenne visant à prévenir/décourager de telles transactions financières (celles qui encouragent la colonisation). » (R 7).
Nous devons donner à leur parole la réso¬nance qu’elle mérite et inviter les diplo¬mates qui se sont déjà prononcés en faveur de la défense des droits des Palestiniens à faire de même. Je pense aux ambassadeurs qui ont signé « La lettre ouverte à Alain Juppé » pour appuyer l’admission de l’Etat de Palestine à l’ONU ou aux anciens hauts dirigeants de l’UE qui ont lancé un appel dans le même sens. Et nous devons aussi inviter les politiques à appuyer ces diplo¬mates à Paris, à Bruxelles comme à Jéru¬salem, Ramallah et à l’ONU.
Voir le rapport complet en anglais
[1] Le rapport 2011 des Consuls généraux des 27 pays de l’UE à Jérusalem-Est
LES 26 MESURES PRECONISEES
(Annexe 2 du Rapport 2011)
A. Jérusalem Est future capitale de l’Etat palestinien
1. En conformité avec les objectifs du Plan stra¬té¬gique et multi sec¬toriel de développement de Jérusalem-Est, soutenir une approche coor¬donnée et une stratégie palestinienne cohérente.
2. Soutenir l’établissement d’une représentation de l’OLP à Jérusalem-Est.
3. Organiser des événements nationaux ou européens (comme les fêtes natio¬nales) à Jérusalem-Est.
4. Accueillir régulièrement des officiels palestiniens lorsque des représentants de haut niveau de l’UE rendent visites aux mis¬sions de l’UE dotées de bureaux ou de résidences à Jérusalem-Est.
5. Éviter la présence d’agents de sécurité et de protocole israéliens lorsque des personnalités euro-péennes de haut rang visitent Jérusalem-Est, y compris la vieille ville.
6. Empêcher/décourager les transactions finan¬cières qui renforcent l’activité de colonisation à Jérusalem-Est lorsque les don¬neurs d’ordre de telles opérations sont européens.
7. Inviter la Commission à réfléchir à une proposition de législation européenne visant à prévenir/décourager de telles transactions financières.
8. Elaborer des directives à caractère non obligatoire à l’intention des tour opérateurs européens afin que les voyages qu’ils organisent/commercialisent ne soutiennent pas l’activité de coloni-sation à Jérusalem-Est.
9 S’assurer que les produits fabriqués dans les colonies de Jérusalem-Est ne bénéficient pas du traitement préférentiel accordé dans le cadre de l’accord d’association UE/Israël.
10 Sensibiliser davantage le public quant à l’origine de ces produits, notamment en élaborant des directives au sujet de leur étiquetage à l’intention des acteurs euro¬péens majeurs du secteur de la distribution.
11 Informer les citoyens européens des risques liés à l’acquisition d’une propriété dans Jérusalem-Est occupée.
B Réactiver les institutions palestiniennes à Jérusalem-Est
1 Insister sur la réactivation – réclamée dans la Feuille de route – des institutions palestiniennes lors des réunions de haut niveau organisées avec les représentants israéliens ou des discussions au sein de l’UE et du Quartet et dans les communiqués/déclarations de ces derniers.
2. En attendant, accueillir des évènements orga¬nisés par la société civile palestinienne de Jéru-salem dans les centres culturels, les consulats et les rési¬dences de diplomates.
3 Exa¬miner les moyens d’associer les institutions palestiniennes à la promotion des intérêts communs de l’UE et de l’OLP.
C. Les droits économiques et sociaux de la population palestinienne
1 Aider les Palestiniens afin qu’ils soient associés à l’élaboration des plans stratégiques urbains concernant Jérusalem-Est de manière à ce que leurs besoins de logement soient pris en compte.
2 Dans le cadre des réunions de haut niveau, souligner les préoccupations sérieuses de l’UE concernant l’insuffisance des services d’urgence de manière à ce que tous les résidents de Jérusalem-Est puissent en bénéficier (ambulances, services de prévention/lutte contre les incendies, ser¬vices de police de proximité…).
3 Coordonner, financer et soutenir des projets à Jérusalem-Est.
D. La dimension religieuse et culturelle de la Cité
1 Soutenir et encou¬rager le dialogue inter religieux à Jérusalem.
2 Encourager les pays arabes à reconnaître la dimension multiculturelle de Jérusalem, y compris son héritage juif et chrétien.
3 Informer les citoyens de l’UE se rendant sur place au sujet de la situation poli¬tique de la ville (par exemple, via des sites internet).
E. Renforcer le rôle de l’Union européenne
1 Améliorer la coordination locale avec les acteurs du Quartet via des contributions au processus d’élaboration des politiques et de prise de décision.
2 Organiser une présence européenne en cas de risque de démolition ou d’éviction de familles palestiniennes.
3 Organiser une présence européenne lorsque les tribunaux sont appelés à rendre un verdict dans les cas de démolition de maison ou d’éviction de familles palestiniennes.
4 Assurer une intervention européenne quand des Palestiniens sont arrêtés ou intimidés par les autorités israéliennes pour des activités politiques, culturelles ou sociales pacifiques menées à Jérusalem-Est.
5 Sensibiliser les visiteurs de haut rang au sujet de sites ou de questions sensibles. Exemple dans le premier cas : la barrière de séparation. Exemples se rapportant au second cas : les questions de logistique (choix de l’hôtel, changement de moyen de transport pour passer de l’Est à l’Ouest et vice versa), les contacts avec le Maire de Jérusalem-Est ou d’autres officiels israéliens. A ce propos, il est recommandé d’éviter de rencontrer ces officiels - tels le Ministre de la Justice israélien - dans leurs bureaux de Jérusalem-Est.
6. Partager les informations concernant les colons connus pour être violents à Jérusalem-Est et examiner s’il convient de leur permettre de se rendre dans les pays de l’Union Européenne.
EHUD BARAK AS RAMBO VS. IRAN
21 February 2012, Alternative Information Center (AIC) http://www.alternativenews.org (Israel)
Michael Warschawski, Alternative Information Center (AIC)
The apparent plans of Netanyahu and Barak to attack Iran are worrying even the Israeli establishment. Michael Warschawski explains.
Israeli journalist Yoel Marcus is not a leftist, and he is used often as a channel for politicians who don’t wish to openly express their opinions. Marcus’ article in Haaretz on 17 February undoubtedly reflects the mood in central Israeli political and security groups, deeply fearful of the possible antics of the Barak-Netanyahu pair vis-à-vis Iran. Following are selected sections which testify to the level of panic gripping parts of the political and even military establishments in light of the intrigues of Israel’s ruling couple.
“The lovely couple of Bibi and Barak act as Rambo, starring Sylvester Stallone. Real men {…}. In contrast to the film, in which the director defines the script and knows how to reach a happy ending, we live in a reality in which there exist numerous question marks. While the team dubbed Israel’s government threatens like Rambo, it is unclear if it knows how such an adventure with will end. We cannot end the nuclear trance of Iran, only delay it at the price of transforming Israel into a target of Iranian revenge for generations to come {…}. I therefore read the burning articles and battle cries of politicians to strike Iran, and I don’t know whether to laugh or cry. This is a task too big for us. {…} It is obvious that Israel must think twice prior to taking suicidal actions against Iran.”
Later in the article Marcus raises “eight questions for Rambo”, i.e. for Ehud Barak. Amongst others: “Is it possible that an attack will solely delay development of the bomb and bring us into a long-term war with Iran? Are we prepared so that Jewish institutions and Israeli delegations throughout the entire world will be transformed into a target for revenge? Do they understand the meaning of launching tens of missiles daily onto Tel Aviv from Iran and its allies, resulting in a mass abandonment of the city, a halting of tourism and escape from Israel?” Marcus concludes: “An attack against crazy Iran is too big for us and is liable to cause sorrow for generations.”
Correct words. Yet it is not Iran that is crazy but the man who lives in a Tel Aviv penthouse. In Barak’s crazy delusions of grandeur, he is willing to bring upon us all the disasters noted by Marcus. According to the polls, in future elections Barak will not receive sufficient votes to enter the Knesset, but until then he is liable to harm us all. He must therefore be removed from power, and immediately.
Translated to English by the Alternative Information Center (AIC).
Tent of Nations Told to Stop Working its Own Land – Be Ready to Act!
21 February 2012, Shalom Rav http://rabbibrant.com (USA)
A Blog by Rabbi Brant Rosen
Friends of Tent of Nations has just shared this upsetting letter from Daoud Nasser (above left):
Dear Friends,
Today, the 14th of February at 1.30 PM and as we were working on our land, specifically in the tree of life orchard, we found on three different places , papers with maps signed by the civil administration of Judea and Samaria which is the Israeli military government.
The papers say that we have to stop working on the land specified on the map, because they declared it as a state land. According to them, this land doesn’t belong to us but it is a state land and we are cultivating it. The papers also say that if we want to challenge this order, we can appeal against it within 45 days in front of the military representative office.
It is a shock to receive something like that after 21 years of legal battle defending our land and the right to it in front of Israeli courts.
We sent those papers to our attorney in Jerusalem and he is going to appeal against it within the next days.
This is just to inform you about what happened today, please be aware that the situation might get worse, please be prepared in case actions are needed. In the meanwhile, our attorney will appeal against it and we will see what kind of reaction we receive”
We will keep you updated and will inform you about our next steps and how you can help.
Thank you so much for your support and solidarity. Please keep us in your thoughts and prayers.
Blessings and Salaam.
Readers of my blog should be well acquainted with my friend and personal hero Daoud Nasser. Last year I wrote about Tent of Nations and my visit, together with twenty JRC congregants, with Daoud on his family farm.
This new development is just the latest in a long history of harassment courtesy of the military administration in the West Bank – an institution that provides the shameful “legal” cover for Israel’s outright theft of Palestinian lands. Please stand by – I will forward any further news from Daoud and let you know how you can act on his behalf.
← The Media Silence is Deafening – Please Voice Your Support for Khader Adnan
Report: Khader Adnan Ends Hunger Strike →
7 Responses to Tent of Nations Told to Stop Working its Own Land – Be Ready to Act!
1. Wendy Carson | February 21, 2012 at 10:12 am | Reply
terrible sad.people who fought and won the right to develop a piece of land that they can call their own has been a dream of people in many countries.to take this away is horrific and displace the people who have been living there.Please keep me informed and let them know that many care.
2. Liz | February 21, 2012 at 10:34 am | Reply
It is so important that we support Daoud and his family. We with more access and privilege than others must act on their behalf. Having met with Daoud on the JRC trip and having been a witness to these atrocities makes this even more urgent.
3. Nancy Amacher | February 21, 2012 at 10:56 am | Reply
I, too, have been to the land of Daoud and his family. It is important to make people aware of these actions and protest such land confiscation.
4. Mary Jo | February 21, 2012 at 11:29 am | Reply
I have been in contact with Bshara and will be going to Tent of Nations soon, I will let you know first hand as soon as anything new develops. Thanks for the post.
MJ
5. Elaine | February 21, 2012 at 3:19 pm | Reply
Having planted a tree in the Tree of Life orchard last year and hosted Daoud in my home a few times, I too care very much about what happens to him and his family. All of us must protest these injustices and do what we can to help.
6. Iain | February 21, 2012 at 3:27 pm | Reply
I visited the TofN last summer and was moved by their story but the peace there was over whelming. My thoughts and prayers are with them all.
7. Steve Lewis | February 22, 2012 at 6:48 am | Reply
They can’t be allowed to do this outright theft of land. Somehow make this foul play case known to the world because it showcases Israel’s ethnic cleansing in action. How I wish I could be there to protest this injustice in person.
A Blog by Rabbi Brant Rosen
Friends of Tent of Nations has just shared this upsetting letter from Daoud Nasser (above left):
Dear Friends,
Today, the 14th of February at 1.30 PM and as we were working on our land, specifically in the tree of life orchard, we found on three different places , papers with maps signed by the civil administration of Judea and Samaria which is the Israeli military government.
The papers say that we have to stop working on the land specified on the map, because they declared it as a state land. According to them, this land doesn’t belong to us but it is a state land and we are cultivating it. The papers also say that if we want to challenge this order, we can appeal against it within 45 days in front of the military representative office.
It is a shock to receive something like that after 21 years of legal battle defending our land and the right to it in front of Israeli courts.
We sent those papers to our attorney in Jerusalem and he is going to appeal against it within the next days.
This is just to inform you about what happened today, please be aware that the situation might get worse, please be prepared in case actions are needed. In the meanwhile, our attorney will appeal against it and we will see what kind of reaction we receive”
We will keep you updated and will inform you about our next steps and how you can help.
Thank you so much for your support and solidarity. Please keep us in your thoughts and prayers.
Blessings and Salaam.
Readers of my blog should be well acquainted with my friend and personal hero Daoud Nasser. Last year I wrote about Tent of Nations and my visit, together with twenty JRC congregants, with Daoud on his family farm.
This new development is just the latest in a long history of harassment courtesy of the military administration in the West Bank – an institution that provides the shameful “legal” cover for Israel’s outright theft of Palestinian lands. Please stand by – I will forward any further news from Daoud and let you know how you can act on his behalf.
← The Media Silence is Deafening – Please Voice Your Support for Khader Adnan
Report: Khader Adnan Ends Hunger Strike →
7 Responses to Tent of Nations Told to Stop Working its Own Land – Be Ready to Act!
1. Wendy Carson | February 21, 2012 at 10:12 am | Reply
terrible sad.people who fought and won the right to develop a piece of land that they can call their own has been a dream of people in many countries.to take this away is horrific and displace the people who have been living there.Please keep me informed and let them know that many care.
2. Liz | February 21, 2012 at 10:34 am | Reply
It is so important that we support Daoud and his family. We with more access and privilege than others must act on their behalf. Having met with Daoud on the JRC trip and having been a witness to these atrocities makes this even more urgent.
3. Nancy Amacher | February 21, 2012 at 10:56 am | Reply
I, too, have been to the land of Daoud and his family. It is important to make people aware of these actions and protest such land confiscation.
4. Mary Jo | February 21, 2012 at 11:29 am | Reply
I have been in contact with Bshara and will be going to Tent of Nations soon, I will let you know first hand as soon as anything new develops. Thanks for the post.
MJ
5. Elaine | February 21, 2012 at 3:19 pm | Reply
Having planted a tree in the Tree of Life orchard last year and hosted Daoud in my home a few times, I too care very much about what happens to him and his family. All of us must protest these injustices and do what we can to help.
6. Iain | February 21, 2012 at 3:27 pm | Reply
I visited the TofN last summer and was moved by their story but the peace there was over whelming. My thoughts and prayers are with them all.
7. Steve Lewis | February 22, 2012 at 6:48 am | Reply
They can’t be allowed to do this outright theft of land. Somehow make this foul play case known to the world because it showcases Israel’s ethnic cleansing in action. How I wish I could be there to protest this injustice in person.
Despite video evidence, officer who shot Israeli demonstrator won’t be charged
22 February 2012, +972 Magazine http://972mag.com (Israel)
Haggai Matar*
The Israeli human rights NGO B’Tselem received a notification from the military prosecution yesterday, informing it that charges will not be filed against an officer who shot an Israeli activist during a 2008 demonstration in Bil’in. B’Tselem intends to appeal the decision.
The incident took place during the weekly demonstration against the separation fence in Bil’in on March15, 2008. At the time, demonstrations used to reach the old route of the fence – which has since been found illegal by the Israeli High Court of Justice but not yet dismantled – and the army would cross the gate in the fence and chase demonstrators back into the village. A video recording of the shooting shows the soldiers marching back towards the fence, and one of them pushing away a photographer standing nearby. At this point, Israeli activist Eran Cohen, standing less than five meters away from the road, is heard shouting, “What are you doing, soldier?! Don’t touch the journalists.” At this point, one of the soldiers, apparently an officer, slightly raises his gun and shoots Cohen in the leg with a rubber-coated bullet, even though it is clear that Cohen was in no way a threat to the soldiers, and that no fighting is happening elsewhere in the area. The bullet penetrated Cohen’s knee, and was later removed in surgery after Cohen was rushed to the hospital.
At the request of B’Tselem, a military police investigation was launched by the end of that month, and the video was submitted for military inspection. Now, almost four years later, the army says the case is closed and no charges are to be filed. The military prosecution did not elaborate on the reasons for its decision.
A silent approval for unjustified violence
This is in no way a unique case in the history of the popular and joint struggle. According to B’Tselem spokesperson Sarit Michaeli, it is safe to say that on the whole, soldiers and border policemen are not charged with the wounding or even the killing of demonstrators. “While we have countless reports of injuries and more than twenty deaths in demonstrations, and while many incidents are documented with footage, you almost never see investigations ending with indictments,” says Michaeli.
In the past, army regulations required that every death caused by soldiers prompt investigation by the military police. With the start of the Second Intifada in October 2000, the army openly canceled these regulations, which were put back to force last April. This is why most deaths of demonstrators, peaceful and stone-throwing alike, have not led to investigations, except for two very rare ones: the killing of Bassem Abu-Rahme in Bil’in (caused by a tear gas canister shot directly to his chest), and that of 10-year-old Ahmad Musa in Nil’in shot in the head with a rubber bullet by a border policeman after a demonstration). Even here, the former has yet to turn into an indictment (investigation was only launched following a long legal struggle on the family’s part), and in the latter case, the charge is negligent manslaughter. The only demonstration-related conviction activists remember in the many years of the popular struggle was that of the two soldiers who shot the cuffed and blindfolded Ashraf Abu-Rahme in the foot.
While Palestinian and Israeli activists keep documenting attacks on demonstrations, and while NGOs keep filing complaints against the use of force, the army on the whole seems untouched. In December, B’Tselem wrote the army with great concern, reporting what seems to be a constant policy of soldiers and officers on the ground to ignore the army’s own regulations, which forbid shooting tear gas canisters at a direct angle. B’Tselem have backed up this claim with extensive footage of soldiers shooting tear gas canisters in the same illegal fashion that caused the deaths of Bassem Abu-Rahme and Mustafa Tamimi. However, just last Thursday the military authorities replied, saying that “security forces use tear gas canisters only to disperse violent rioters, and only in an arched angle.”
“They are not even willing to admit that soldiers are disobeying their own regulations”, says Michaeli, “what kind of a message do you think that gives the soldiers?”
*Haggai Matar is an Israeli journalist and political activist. After writing for the short-lived Palestine Times and for Ha'ir Tel Aviv he is currently working as the municipal correspondent of Zman Tel Aviv, the local supplement of Ma'ariv, and is a prominent writer at the independent Hebrew website MySay.
In 2002 Matar was part of the Shministim (Seniors') Letter to then PM Ariel Sharon, and was imprisoned for two years for his refusal to enlist to the Israeli army. Since his release he has been active in various groups against the occupation, as well as in several class-based struggles within the Israeli society.
Contact haggai@hotmail.com
Haggai Matar*
The Israeli human rights NGO B’Tselem received a notification from the military prosecution yesterday, informing it that charges will not be filed against an officer who shot an Israeli activist during a 2008 demonstration in Bil’in. B’Tselem intends to appeal the decision.
The incident took place during the weekly demonstration against the separation fence in Bil’in on March15, 2008. At the time, demonstrations used to reach the old route of the fence – which has since been found illegal by the Israeli High Court of Justice but not yet dismantled – and the army would cross the gate in the fence and chase demonstrators back into the village. A video recording of the shooting shows the soldiers marching back towards the fence, and one of them pushing away a photographer standing nearby. At this point, Israeli activist Eran Cohen, standing less than five meters away from the road, is heard shouting, “What are you doing, soldier?! Don’t touch the journalists.” At this point, one of the soldiers, apparently an officer, slightly raises his gun and shoots Cohen in the leg with a rubber-coated bullet, even though it is clear that Cohen was in no way a threat to the soldiers, and that no fighting is happening elsewhere in the area. The bullet penetrated Cohen’s knee, and was later removed in surgery after Cohen was rushed to the hospital.
At the request of B’Tselem, a military police investigation was launched by the end of that month, and the video was submitted for military inspection. Now, almost four years later, the army says the case is closed and no charges are to be filed. The military prosecution did not elaborate on the reasons for its decision.
A silent approval for unjustified violence
This is in no way a unique case in the history of the popular and joint struggle. According to B’Tselem spokesperson Sarit Michaeli, it is safe to say that on the whole, soldiers and border policemen are not charged with the wounding or even the killing of demonstrators. “While we have countless reports of injuries and more than twenty deaths in demonstrations, and while many incidents are documented with footage, you almost never see investigations ending with indictments,” says Michaeli.
In the past, army regulations required that every death caused by soldiers prompt investigation by the military police. With the start of the Second Intifada in October 2000, the army openly canceled these regulations, which were put back to force last April. This is why most deaths of demonstrators, peaceful and stone-throwing alike, have not led to investigations, except for two very rare ones: the killing of Bassem Abu-Rahme in Bil’in (caused by a tear gas canister shot directly to his chest), and that of 10-year-old Ahmad Musa in Nil’in shot in the head with a rubber bullet by a border policeman after a demonstration). Even here, the former has yet to turn into an indictment (investigation was only launched following a long legal struggle on the family’s part), and in the latter case, the charge is negligent manslaughter. The only demonstration-related conviction activists remember in the many years of the popular struggle was that of the two soldiers who shot the cuffed and blindfolded Ashraf Abu-Rahme in the foot.
While Palestinian and Israeli activists keep documenting attacks on demonstrations, and while NGOs keep filing complaints against the use of force, the army on the whole seems untouched. In December, B’Tselem wrote the army with great concern, reporting what seems to be a constant policy of soldiers and officers on the ground to ignore the army’s own regulations, which forbid shooting tear gas canisters at a direct angle. B’Tselem have backed up this claim with extensive footage of soldiers shooting tear gas canisters in the same illegal fashion that caused the deaths of Bassem Abu-Rahme and Mustafa Tamimi. However, just last Thursday the military authorities replied, saying that “security forces use tear gas canisters only to disperse violent rioters, and only in an arched angle.”
“They are not even willing to admit that soldiers are disobeying their own regulations”, says Michaeli, “what kind of a message do you think that gives the soldiers?”
*Haggai Matar is an Israeli journalist and political activist. After writing for the short-lived Palestine Times and for Ha'ir Tel Aviv he is currently working as the municipal correspondent of Zman Tel Aviv, the local supplement of Ma'ariv, and is a prominent writer at the independent Hebrew website MySay.
In 2002 Matar was part of the Shministim (Seniors') Letter to then PM Ariel Sharon, and was imprisoned for two years for his refusal to enlist to the Israeli army. Since his release he has been active in various groups against the occupation, as well as in several class-based struggles within the Israeli society.
Contact haggai@hotmail.com
segunda-feira, 20 de fevereiro de 2012
Israel's Civil Administration promoting legislation to let settlers build dirt roads without planning approval
20 February 2012, Haaretz הארץ (Israel)
If approved, the new policy would substantially expand the ability of Jewish settlers in the West Bank to take control of additional land.
By Chaim Levinson
The Israel Defense Force’s Civil Administration in the West Bank is promoting legislation that would allow Jewish settlers to build new dirt roads without planning approval if their purpose is to protect state-owned land.
Currently the creation of any new road or even changing its route requires full approval of the planning authorities, including the National Planning and Building Council, and is followed by the issuance of individual building permits.
If approved, the new policy would substantially expand the ability of Jewish settlers in the West Bank to take control of additional land.
Under the new approach, no permits would be required for the construction of roads designed to “protect state lands” unless the roads were constructed from gravel or asphalt.
Construction of gravel and asphalt thoroughfares would still require the full planning approval process, but dirt roads accommodating all-terrain vehicles would no longer require approval.
Most West Bank settlements are surrounded by fencing, but lying beyond the fences there is often considerable state-owned land, and the shift in policy would enable the Civil Administration to keep Palestinians off this land by giving access to security vehicles from the settlements, in an effort to keep the West Bank’s Arab residents from encroaching on the land.
The proposed change in policy would not be required for dirt roads needed to maintain security in areas around West Bank settlements, as the IDF GOC Central Command already has authority to seize land for the construction of security roads around the settlements without a building permit.
If the change in policy is approved with regard to the protection of state land, as a practical matter it would significantly expand the amount of land around West Bank settlements that is off-limits to Palestinians.
In response, the Civil Administration issued a statement in which it said a question was put to the Justice Ministry, but it was not regarding the creation of roads but simply putting markers on the land itself to indicate where the boundaries of state land are located.
“The request did not deal with the paving of roads for vehicular traffic to preserve this land. Work at the headquarters on the issue has not yet been completed,” the Civil Administration said.
At a hearing last week at the Ofer military court, however, Lt. Col. Zvi Cohen testified regarding land beyond the security fence at the Nili settlement east of the Israeli city of Modi’in.
As the hearing progressed, legal questions were raised about roads on state lands. The Civil Administration advised the court that it would seek to amend the law and would seek approval from Deputy Attorney General Malkiel Balas for roads protecting state lands.
If approved, the new policy would substantially expand the ability of Jewish settlers in the West Bank to take control of additional land.
By Chaim Levinson
The Israel Defense Force’s Civil Administration in the West Bank is promoting legislation that would allow Jewish settlers to build new dirt roads without planning approval if their purpose is to protect state-owned land.
Currently the creation of any new road or even changing its route requires full approval of the planning authorities, including the National Planning and Building Council, and is followed by the issuance of individual building permits.
If approved, the new policy would substantially expand the ability of Jewish settlers in the West Bank to take control of additional land.
Under the new approach, no permits would be required for the construction of roads designed to “protect state lands” unless the roads were constructed from gravel or asphalt.
Construction of gravel and asphalt thoroughfares would still require the full planning approval process, but dirt roads accommodating all-terrain vehicles would no longer require approval.
Most West Bank settlements are surrounded by fencing, but lying beyond the fences there is often considerable state-owned land, and the shift in policy would enable the Civil Administration to keep Palestinians off this land by giving access to security vehicles from the settlements, in an effort to keep the West Bank’s Arab residents from encroaching on the land.
The proposed change in policy would not be required for dirt roads needed to maintain security in areas around West Bank settlements, as the IDF GOC Central Command already has authority to seize land for the construction of security roads around the settlements without a building permit.
If the change in policy is approved with regard to the protection of state land, as a practical matter it would significantly expand the amount of land around West Bank settlements that is off-limits to Palestinians.
In response, the Civil Administration issued a statement in which it said a question was put to the Justice Ministry, but it was not regarding the creation of roads but simply putting markers on the land itself to indicate where the boundaries of state land are located.
“The request did not deal with the paving of roads for vehicular traffic to preserve this land. Work at the headquarters on the issue has not yet been completed,” the Civil Administration said.
At a hearing last week at the Ofer military court, however, Lt. Col. Zvi Cohen testified regarding land beyond the security fence at the Nili settlement east of the Israeli city of Modi’in.
As the hearing progressed, legal questions were raised about roads on state lands. The Civil Administration advised the court that it would seek to amend the law and would seek approval from Deputy Attorney General Malkiel Balas for roads protecting state lands.
ISRAELI RIGHTS GROUP TO EHUD BARAK: PUT KHADER ADNAN ON TRIAL OR RELEASE HIM IMMEDIATELY
15 February 2012, Mondoweiss http://mondoweiss.net (USA)
by Adam Horowitz
The Association for Civil Rights in Israel sent the following letter to Ehud Barak yesterday:
14 February 2012
Mr. Ehud Barak
Minister of Defense
Re: Urgent Request to Release or Try Khader Adnan Mohammad Musa
Dear Mr. Minister:
I am writing to ask for your urgent intervention to ensure the immediate release of Khader Adnan, currently in administrative detention, who has been on a hunger strike for 60 days; or alternatively – if the evidence so warrants – to put him on trial.
Mr. Adnan was arrested on 17 December 2011 and has been in administrative detention since 8 January 2012; to this day, no charges have been filed against him and he has not been given the opportunity to address any claims in a fair trial. To protest the abuse and brutal treatment that Mr. Adnan says he experienced during his arrest and interrogation, and to protest his continued detention without trial, Mr. Adnan began a hunger strike. According to Israeli human rights organization Physicians for Human Rights – Israel (PHR-Israel), Mr. Adnan’s health has seriously deteriorated as a result of the hunger strike, and continuing it will endanger his life. Under these circumstances, denying Mr. Adnan his freedom without trial is particularly grave, and immediate measures should be taken to release him or give him a fair trial.
Administrative detention, which allows the denial of a person’s freedom for months without trial, severely harms basic human rights, above all the right to freedom and dignity. Although administrative detainees are brought before a judge for review of their detention, the preponderance of material on which the detention is based remains classified – hidden from the suspect and his attorney – hence the detainee has no real opportunity to defend himself or refute the accusations against him. Under these circumstances, judicial oversight is no real guarantee of the lawfulness of the detention, and even the fairest of judges cannot administer justice. Judicial oversight in this context lacks the minimal assurance of a proper judicial process, and can doubtfully be regarded as a fair judicial procedure.
Beyond the injury of administrative detention to a person’s elementary right to due process, such detention is not limited in time (since it can be extended indefinitely). Therefore the detainee is in an untenable situation of ongoing uncertainty about his future and the length of his incarceration. This can be a source of severe emotional strain and constitutes additional humiliation, as the individual lacks all tools to defend himself.
Despite the extreme nature of administrative detention, Israeli security forces have over the years made routine use of it in the Occupied Territories. On 31 December 2011, according to B’Tselem data, no fewer than 307 Palestinians were being held in administrative detention – and this number has shown a worrisome increase recently. Mr. Adnan’s hunger strike is yet another reminder of the severe violation of human rights caused by isolating someone from his environment and family with no manifest reason or proven basis.
According to the ruling by the Military Court of Appeals on 13 February 2012, the detention order against Mr. Adnan was issued because of “organizational activity” attributed to him in the Islamic Jihad organization. Clearly terrorist activity is completely unacceptable, and is itself a fatal blow to the most fundamental human rights, including the right to life. However, if a claim is being made that Mr. Adnan is involved in any unlawful activity, there is a basic obligation to inform him of the nature of the specific accusations against him, and to conduct a fair proceeding that allows for investigation of his guilt.
This case is particularly grave in light of the shocking reports of Mr. Adnan’s detention conditions. According to Physicians for Human Rights, he is handcuffed to his bed on both sides in Sieff Hospital in Safed – in contravention of procedures concerning the shackling of a detainee in a public place, medical ethics, and logic, as this would not be necessary to prevent the escape of someone in such poor physical health.
In light of the above, and considering the deteriorating state of Mr. Adnan’s health, I urgently appeal to you to ensure Mr. Adnan’s immediate release from administrative detention or that he be put on trial. Human morality, rational thinking, and concern for the democratic character of Israel obligate us to bring this terrible affair to an end.
Sami Michael, President
The Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI)
by Adam Horowitz
The Association for Civil Rights in Israel sent the following letter to Ehud Barak yesterday:
14 February 2012
Mr. Ehud Barak
Minister of Defense
Re: Urgent Request to Release or Try Khader Adnan Mohammad Musa
Dear Mr. Minister:
I am writing to ask for your urgent intervention to ensure the immediate release of Khader Adnan, currently in administrative detention, who has been on a hunger strike for 60 days; or alternatively – if the evidence so warrants – to put him on trial.
Mr. Adnan was arrested on 17 December 2011 and has been in administrative detention since 8 January 2012; to this day, no charges have been filed against him and he has not been given the opportunity to address any claims in a fair trial. To protest the abuse and brutal treatment that Mr. Adnan says he experienced during his arrest and interrogation, and to protest his continued detention without trial, Mr. Adnan began a hunger strike. According to Israeli human rights organization Physicians for Human Rights – Israel (PHR-Israel), Mr. Adnan’s health has seriously deteriorated as a result of the hunger strike, and continuing it will endanger his life. Under these circumstances, denying Mr. Adnan his freedom without trial is particularly grave, and immediate measures should be taken to release him or give him a fair trial.
Administrative detention, which allows the denial of a person’s freedom for months without trial, severely harms basic human rights, above all the right to freedom and dignity. Although administrative detainees are brought before a judge for review of their detention, the preponderance of material on which the detention is based remains classified – hidden from the suspect and his attorney – hence the detainee has no real opportunity to defend himself or refute the accusations against him. Under these circumstances, judicial oversight is no real guarantee of the lawfulness of the detention, and even the fairest of judges cannot administer justice. Judicial oversight in this context lacks the minimal assurance of a proper judicial process, and can doubtfully be regarded as a fair judicial procedure.
Beyond the injury of administrative detention to a person’s elementary right to due process, such detention is not limited in time (since it can be extended indefinitely). Therefore the detainee is in an untenable situation of ongoing uncertainty about his future and the length of his incarceration. This can be a source of severe emotional strain and constitutes additional humiliation, as the individual lacks all tools to defend himself.
Despite the extreme nature of administrative detention, Israeli security forces have over the years made routine use of it in the Occupied Territories. On 31 December 2011, according to B’Tselem data, no fewer than 307 Palestinians were being held in administrative detention – and this number has shown a worrisome increase recently. Mr. Adnan’s hunger strike is yet another reminder of the severe violation of human rights caused by isolating someone from his environment and family with no manifest reason or proven basis.
According to the ruling by the Military Court of Appeals on 13 February 2012, the detention order against Mr. Adnan was issued because of “organizational activity” attributed to him in the Islamic Jihad organization. Clearly terrorist activity is completely unacceptable, and is itself a fatal blow to the most fundamental human rights, including the right to life. However, if a claim is being made that Mr. Adnan is involved in any unlawful activity, there is a basic obligation to inform him of the nature of the specific accusations against him, and to conduct a fair proceeding that allows for investigation of his guilt.
This case is particularly grave in light of the shocking reports of Mr. Adnan’s detention conditions. According to Physicians for Human Rights, he is handcuffed to his bed on both sides in Sieff Hospital in Safed – in contravention of procedures concerning the shackling of a detainee in a public place, medical ethics, and logic, as this would not be necessary to prevent the escape of someone in such poor physical health.
In light of the above, and considering the deteriorating state of Mr. Adnan’s health, I urgently appeal to you to ensure Mr. Adnan’s immediate release from administrative detention or that he be put on trial. Human morality, rational thinking, and concern for the democratic character of Israel obligate us to bring this terrible affair to an end.
Sami Michael, President
The Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI)
THOU SHALT NOT KILL (THYSELF)
18 February 2012, Gush Shalom גוש שלום (Israel)
Uri Avnery אורי אבנרי
AFTER THE founding of Israel, God appeared to David Ben-Gurion and told him: “You have created a state for my chosen people in my holy land. This merits a great reward. Tell me what you wish, and I will grant it.”
Ben-Gurion answered: “Almighty God, I wish that every person in Israel shall be wise, honest and a member of the Labor Party.”
“Dear me,” said God, “That is too much even for the Almighty. But I decree that every Israeli shall be two of the three.”
Since then, if a wise Israeli is a member of the Labor party, he is not honest. If an honest Israeli is a member of the Labor party, he is not wise. If he is wise and honest, he is not a member of the Labor Party.
THIS JOKE was popular in the 1950s. After 1967, another much less funny formula took its place.
It goes like this: many Israelis ask God for their state to be Jewish and democratic, and that it will include the entire country between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River. That is too much even for the Almighty. So he asks them to choose between a state that is Jewish and democratic but only in part of the country, or a state in all the country that is Jewish but not democratic, or a state in the entire country that is democratic but not Jewish. To which I would add a fourth option: A Jewish and democratic state in the entire country, but only after driving out all the Arabs – some 5.5 million at this point, and growing quickly.
This is the choice facing us today as it did almost 45 years ago. It has only become more sharply defined.
For any foreseeable future, the fourth alternative can be excluded. The circumstances which led, in 1948, to the expulsion of more than half the Palestinian people from the territory that became Israel were unique, and not likely to return in the coming decades. So we must deal with the present demographic reality.
The current government is determined to prevent any peace that would compel it to give up any part of the occupied territories (22% of pre-1948 Palestine). There is no one around who would compel them to do so.
What remains?
A state that is either non-democratic or non-Jewish.
As things stand, the first possibility is certain to be realized, or, rather, to realize itself. This needs no conscious decision, since it is the default situation that already exists de facto.
This means, to use the popular catch phrase, an apartheid state: a state in which every instrument of power is in the hands of the Jewish-Israeli majority (some 6.5 million people), with limited rights for the 1.5 million Palestinians with Israeli citizenship. The Palestinians in the occupied West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip, some four million, are granted no rights whatsoever - neither national, nor human nor civil.
The present state of “temporary” occupation can last forever, and is therefore ideal for this purpose. However, a future Israeli government, an even more nationalist one, could change the formal situation by annexing these territories to Israel. That would make, in practice, no difference.
As many Israelis see it, this situation could go on forever. The official slogan is: “We have no partner for peace”.
But can it really last? The Palestinian population throughout the country is growing rapidly, soon enough it will constitute the majority. The idealists who embrace this as the “One-state Solution” believe that the Apartheid State will slowly turn into a “state of all its citizens”.
If, after decades of oppression, civil war, atrocities and other plagues this really came into being, it would quickly turn into a Palestinian state, with a Jewish minority, like the Whites in present South Africa. It would be a negation of the whole Zionist enterprise, whose core purpose was to have one place in the world where Jews would be a majority. Most Jewish Israelis would probably emigrate.
For an Israeli, this would mean national suicide. Yet it is the inevitable outcome if the state continues on its present course.
IF A person wants to kill himself, as is his right, he has many ways to do so: poisoning, shooting, hanging, jumping from the roof etc. As a state, Israel also has several options.
Apart from the external ticking bomb (the “One-state Solution”), Israel also has an internal ticking bomb, which may be even more dangerous. Like the first option, the second one is already well on its way. If the first option depends at least partly on outside factors, the second is entirely self-made.
When Israel came into being, Orthodox Jews were a small minority. Since Ben-Gurion needed them for his coalition, he gave them some privileges which looked cheap to him. The Orthodox got their own education system, financed by the state, and were exempted from army service.
Some 60 years later, these privileges have grown to gigantic dimensions. To compensate for the lives lost in the Holocaust, and to increase the Jewish population, the Israeli government has encouraged natural increase by generous children’s subsidies. Since the religious of all shades have reproduced much more than any other Israelis (except Muslim Arabs), their part in the population has grown by leaps and bounds.
Orthodox families generally have 8-10 children. All these go to religious schools, where they study exclusively religious texts and don’t acquire any skills useful for working in a modern society. They don’t need them, since they do not work at all, devoting their entire lives to the study of the Talmud. They don’t need to interrupt their studying of the dead texts, because they don’t serve in the army.
If these were marginal phenomena in the early days of the state, they are now rapidly leading to a national emergency. Right from the beginning, almost all government coalitions have relied on the religious parties, because no party has ever won an overall majority in the Knesset. Almost all governing parties had to bribe their religious partners with ever increasing subsidies for children and adults, thus encouraging the growth of a population which neither serves in the army nor does any work.
The absence of the Orthodox from the labor force has severe effects on the economy, attested to by world financial institutions. Their absence from the army – as well as the absence of the Arab citizens, who are not drafted for obvious reasons – means that soon almost half the male population will not serve. This compels all the others to serve three full years, and then to do reserve duty for many more years.
Also, very soon, half the first grade pupils in Israel will be religious children, destined for a life without work, without paying taxes or serving in the army – all this paid for by the taxes of the diminishing number of the non-Orthodox.
Recently, after deepening unrest between religious and non-religious in Bet Shemesh, 25 km west of Jerusalem, the secularists demanded that the town be divided into two, one half Orthodox and the other secular. The Interior Minister, himself a leader of an Orthodox party, rejected this outright. As he candidly explained. since the Orthodox do not work and cannot pay municipal taxes, they cannot sustain a town of their own. They need the secular to work and pay.
This grotesque situation exists throughout the state. One can calculate when the whole edifice will come crashing down. International financial institutions as well as Israeli experts foretell disaster. Yet our political system does not make any change possible. The hold of the religious parties is as strong as ever.
Another method of suicide.
A THIRD method is less dramatic. Israel is rapidly becoming a state in which normal people just may not want to live.
In his monumental opus on the Crusades, the late British historian Steven Runciman maintained that the Crusader state did not collapse because of its military defeat, but because too many of its inhabitants just packed up and went back to Europe. Though many of them belonged to the 4th and even 8th generation of crusaders, the Crusader state had lost its attraction for them. The state of perpetual war and inner stagnation drove them out. The state collapsed when many more went away than came to join.
The Crusaders felt a stronger sense of belonging to Christendom than to the local Kingdom of Jerusalem. Today, many Israelis feel themselves first of all as Jews, belonging to a world-wide people, and only in second place Israelis.
That makes emigration easier.
A state without democracy, without equality, condemned by itself to an endless war, dominated by religious fanatics, with the gap between the abject poor and a handful of immensely rich growing from year to year – such a state will look less and less attractive to bright young people, who can easily find a better life elsewhere, while retaining their Jewish identity.
That, too, is a kind of national suicide.
I AM not, by nature, a prophet of doom. Quite the contrary.
We can easily avert all these dangers. But first of all we must recognize them and see where they are leading us.
I believe that the people of Israel – the Israeli nation – have the will to survive. But in order to survive, they must wake up from their apathetic stupor and change course – turning towards peace based on the two-state solution, separating the state from religion and building a new social order.
In the Jewish religion, suicide is a sin. It would be ironic if future historians were to conclude that the “Jewish State” committed suicide.
Uri Avnery אורי אבנרי
AFTER THE founding of Israel, God appeared to David Ben-Gurion and told him: “You have created a state for my chosen people in my holy land. This merits a great reward. Tell me what you wish, and I will grant it.”
Ben-Gurion answered: “Almighty God, I wish that every person in Israel shall be wise, honest and a member of the Labor Party.”
“Dear me,” said God, “That is too much even for the Almighty. But I decree that every Israeli shall be two of the three.”
Since then, if a wise Israeli is a member of the Labor party, he is not honest. If an honest Israeli is a member of the Labor party, he is not wise. If he is wise and honest, he is not a member of the Labor Party.
THIS JOKE was popular in the 1950s. After 1967, another much less funny formula took its place.
It goes like this: many Israelis ask God for their state to be Jewish and democratic, and that it will include the entire country between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River. That is too much even for the Almighty. So he asks them to choose between a state that is Jewish and democratic but only in part of the country, or a state in all the country that is Jewish but not democratic, or a state in the entire country that is democratic but not Jewish. To which I would add a fourth option: A Jewish and democratic state in the entire country, but only after driving out all the Arabs – some 5.5 million at this point, and growing quickly.
This is the choice facing us today as it did almost 45 years ago. It has only become more sharply defined.
For any foreseeable future, the fourth alternative can be excluded. The circumstances which led, in 1948, to the expulsion of more than half the Palestinian people from the territory that became Israel were unique, and not likely to return in the coming decades. So we must deal with the present demographic reality.
The current government is determined to prevent any peace that would compel it to give up any part of the occupied territories (22% of pre-1948 Palestine). There is no one around who would compel them to do so.
What remains?
A state that is either non-democratic or non-Jewish.
As things stand, the first possibility is certain to be realized, or, rather, to realize itself. This needs no conscious decision, since it is the default situation that already exists de facto.
This means, to use the popular catch phrase, an apartheid state: a state in which every instrument of power is in the hands of the Jewish-Israeli majority (some 6.5 million people), with limited rights for the 1.5 million Palestinians with Israeli citizenship. The Palestinians in the occupied West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip, some four million, are granted no rights whatsoever - neither national, nor human nor civil.
The present state of “temporary” occupation can last forever, and is therefore ideal for this purpose. However, a future Israeli government, an even more nationalist one, could change the formal situation by annexing these territories to Israel. That would make, in practice, no difference.
As many Israelis see it, this situation could go on forever. The official slogan is: “We have no partner for peace”.
But can it really last? The Palestinian population throughout the country is growing rapidly, soon enough it will constitute the majority. The idealists who embrace this as the “One-state Solution” believe that the Apartheid State will slowly turn into a “state of all its citizens”.
If, after decades of oppression, civil war, atrocities and other plagues this really came into being, it would quickly turn into a Palestinian state, with a Jewish minority, like the Whites in present South Africa. It would be a negation of the whole Zionist enterprise, whose core purpose was to have one place in the world where Jews would be a majority. Most Jewish Israelis would probably emigrate.
For an Israeli, this would mean national suicide. Yet it is the inevitable outcome if the state continues on its present course.
IF A person wants to kill himself, as is his right, he has many ways to do so: poisoning, shooting, hanging, jumping from the roof etc. As a state, Israel also has several options.
Apart from the external ticking bomb (the “One-state Solution”), Israel also has an internal ticking bomb, which may be even more dangerous. Like the first option, the second one is already well on its way. If the first option depends at least partly on outside factors, the second is entirely self-made.
When Israel came into being, Orthodox Jews were a small minority. Since Ben-Gurion needed them for his coalition, he gave them some privileges which looked cheap to him. The Orthodox got their own education system, financed by the state, and were exempted from army service.
Some 60 years later, these privileges have grown to gigantic dimensions. To compensate for the lives lost in the Holocaust, and to increase the Jewish population, the Israeli government has encouraged natural increase by generous children’s subsidies. Since the religious of all shades have reproduced much more than any other Israelis (except Muslim Arabs), their part in the population has grown by leaps and bounds.
Orthodox families generally have 8-10 children. All these go to religious schools, where they study exclusively religious texts and don’t acquire any skills useful for working in a modern society. They don’t need them, since they do not work at all, devoting their entire lives to the study of the Talmud. They don’t need to interrupt their studying of the dead texts, because they don’t serve in the army.
If these were marginal phenomena in the early days of the state, they are now rapidly leading to a national emergency. Right from the beginning, almost all government coalitions have relied on the religious parties, because no party has ever won an overall majority in the Knesset. Almost all governing parties had to bribe their religious partners with ever increasing subsidies for children and adults, thus encouraging the growth of a population which neither serves in the army nor does any work.
The absence of the Orthodox from the labor force has severe effects on the economy, attested to by world financial institutions. Their absence from the army – as well as the absence of the Arab citizens, who are not drafted for obvious reasons – means that soon almost half the male population will not serve. This compels all the others to serve three full years, and then to do reserve duty for many more years.
Also, very soon, half the first grade pupils in Israel will be religious children, destined for a life without work, without paying taxes or serving in the army – all this paid for by the taxes of the diminishing number of the non-Orthodox.
Recently, after deepening unrest between religious and non-religious in Bet Shemesh, 25 km west of Jerusalem, the secularists demanded that the town be divided into two, one half Orthodox and the other secular. The Interior Minister, himself a leader of an Orthodox party, rejected this outright. As he candidly explained. since the Orthodox do not work and cannot pay municipal taxes, they cannot sustain a town of their own. They need the secular to work and pay.
This grotesque situation exists throughout the state. One can calculate when the whole edifice will come crashing down. International financial institutions as well as Israeli experts foretell disaster. Yet our political system does not make any change possible. The hold of the religious parties is as strong as ever.
Another method of suicide.
A THIRD method is less dramatic. Israel is rapidly becoming a state in which normal people just may not want to live.
In his monumental opus on the Crusades, the late British historian Steven Runciman maintained that the Crusader state did not collapse because of its military defeat, but because too many of its inhabitants just packed up and went back to Europe. Though many of them belonged to the 4th and even 8th generation of crusaders, the Crusader state had lost its attraction for them. The state of perpetual war and inner stagnation drove them out. The state collapsed when many more went away than came to join.
The Crusaders felt a stronger sense of belonging to Christendom than to the local Kingdom of Jerusalem. Today, many Israelis feel themselves first of all as Jews, belonging to a world-wide people, and only in second place Israelis.
That makes emigration easier.
A state without democracy, without equality, condemned by itself to an endless war, dominated by religious fanatics, with the gap between the abject poor and a handful of immensely rich growing from year to year – such a state will look less and less attractive to bright young people, who can easily find a better life elsewhere, while retaining their Jewish identity.
That, too, is a kind of national suicide.
I AM not, by nature, a prophet of doom. Quite the contrary.
We can easily avert all these dangers. But first of all we must recognize them and see where they are leading us.
I believe that the people of Israel – the Israeli nation – have the will to survive. But in order to survive, they must wake up from their apathetic stupor and change course – turning towards peace based on the two-state solution, separating the state from religion and building a new social order.
In the Jewish religion, suicide is a sin. It would be ironic if future historians were to conclude that the “Jewish State” committed suicide.
FACTS ABOUT ISRAELI APARTHEID [index]
February 2012, it Is apartheid itisapartheid.org/occupied.html (USA)
Israeli Apartheid in the Occupied Territories?
No matter what you call it: the nearly 40 years of occupation of the West Bank and Gaza are ILLEGAL, IMMORAL and UNJUST
Two Systems: Separate and Unequal
Palestinians are under Military Law and face the constant threat of arrest and detention without charge and can be held indefinitely. They have no right to representation or trial. Israelis living in illegal settlements on Palestinian land have all the privileges of Israeli Civil Law. As citizens of Israel, they can vote, seek redress in court, and have freedom of speech and assembly. 2
• Palestinian villages and towns face collective punishment in the form of bulldozing of family houses, extended 24 hour curfews, closures, military raids, violence and harassment. Israeli settlers face no such collective punishment. 3
• Palestinian land ownership (agricultural and residential) is subject to military and economic confiscation. The purpose is to establish Jewish only settlements, take water resources and confine the Palestinian population into smaller and smaller cantons. Israelis face no land confiscation. 4
• Over 17,000 Palestinian houses have been demolished, creating 100,000 of thousands homeless. Over a million Palestinian olive and fruit trees have been uprooted. A few Israeli outposts have been dismantled, but there has been no widespread destruction of Israeli homes and trees. 5
• Palestinians are prohibited from using the extensive network of settler only highways that connect the settlements to Israel. 8
• Palestinian workers employed in settlement industrial zones receive only the sweatshop-like minimum wage mandated by Jordanian law in 1967. In the settlements, Israeli workers receive all the rights and benefits of Israeli employment law including a much larger minimum wage. 9
• The Israeli military authority controls virtually all the water in the West Bank. 73% of West Bank water is piped back to Israel. Illegal Jewish settlers use 10% of West Bank water. Palestinians have access to only 17% of their own water and must buy it from Isrrael at 4 times the price Israelis pay. 10
• The wall fragments Palestinian communities; it separates families from their land, their livelihood, health care and schools. The wall also divides communities and families from each other. The wall does not fragment Israeli settlements; it is built in such a way to as to annex them to Israel proper. 11
"The permit system for the Closed Zone is administered in an arbitrary and humiliating manner…This system, which subjects Palestinian freedom of movement to the whim of the Occupying Power, creates anger, anxiety and humiliation among the population." (UNHCHR) 12
West Bank
Bantustans Palestinians are ghettoized in 12 percent of their original territory. 13
The West Bank is divided up into 70 isolated cantons with no physical movement without Israel permission. 13
There are over 500 military check points where Palestinians often wait hours, and must have ID cards and passes just to travel short distances. Israeli settlers can travel easily on Israeli-only roads. 14
This dispossession is reminiscent of apartheid which set aside 13% of the lands as “Bantustan” homelands for black South Africans. South Africa
Bantustans
________________________________________
Sources
1. United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.
http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/11.htm Ratifying vote.
http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/treaty8_asp.htm
2. B’Tselem 2007 Annual report: Human Rights in the Occupied Territories Page 33.
http://www.btselem.org/Download/200712_Annual_Report_eng.doc
3. B’Tselem 2007 Annual report: Human Rights in the Occupied Territories Page 13.
Human Rights Watch
2004 briefing to the o the 60th Session of the UN Commission on Human Rights.
http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2004/01/29/isrlpa7482.htm
4. UNOCHA The Humanitarian Impact on Palestinians of Isreali settlements and other infastructure in the West Bank, July 2007. http://www.ochaopt.org/
5. Israeli committee against home demolitions: 2007. Article: Demolition Statistics Since 1967. http://www.icahd.org/eng/articles.asp?menu=6&submenu=2&article=402
United Nations Commission on Human Rights 2004 Report: Question of the Violation of Human rights in the Occupied Arab Territories, Including, Palestine. http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/85255db800470aa485255d8b004e349a/ff0f43cfe0a4100985256e6e005518a7!OpenDocument
6. 2001 Memo on Palestine to Thomas Friedman.
http://progressiveaustin.org/mandelap.htm
7. As quoted in NY Times December 24, 1989.
8. B'Tselem, "Forbidden Roads: The Discriminatory West Bank Road Regime," August 2004.
http://www.btselem.org/English/Publications/Summaries/200408_Forbidden_Roads.asp 9. Cementing Israeli Apartheid: The Role of World Bank.
http://contradictme.wordpress.com/the-world-bank-funds-israel-palestine-wall/
10. B’Tselem Water Crisis 2007 report.
http://www.btselem.org/english/Water/Shared_Sources.asp
11. OCHA United Nations Office of the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs Maps the West Bank and fragmentation of land. http://www.ochaopt.org 12. UNHCR Commission on Human Rights, Sixtieth Session.
http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/fd807e46661e3689852570d00069e918/2aa105942bee1a2e85256e67006e6d7b!OpenDocument 13. International development research center Canada.
http://idrinfo.idrc.ca/archive/corpdocs/119922/Word/3-119922-Chapter01.doc
14. OCHA United Nations Office of the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs Monitors Check Points in the West Bank. http://www.ochaopt.org
Assinar:
Postagens (Atom)