22 August 2011, + 972 http://972mag.com (Israel)
Yossi Gurvitz*
The Minister of Defense and the Prime Minister claim the terrorist attack last week came from Gaza. They have yet to provide any proof – and the evidence looks dubious
(PM Netanyahu blaming PRC for Eilat attack at press conference/Photo: Activestills)
An unknown group carried out a combined attack from Sinai into Israel, hitting a number of targets. Six Israeli civilians were murdered and two soldiers were killed; so were seven of the terrorists and a number of Egyptian security personnel. While the attacks were carried out, Minister of Defense Ehud Barak quickly told the public the people responsible were the Popular Resistance Committee of the Gaza Strip; within hours the IAF attacked a house in the Strip and killed several of its leaders. Later that day, Prime Minister Netanyahu said that the people responsible for the attacks were killed. This attack by the IAF is what spurred the recent round of escalation – and it’s worth noting the IAF has been raising the flames in the regions for about a month, with the Israeli media quietly ignoring it.
However, Israel has never supplied any proof that the attack has indeed originated in the Gaza Strip. The PRC have denied involvement in the attack. An Israeli propaganda apparatus, the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, also claimed (Hebrew) the PRC was behind the attacks, but had to tautologically write “no terror organizations has publicly claimed responsibility for the attack and the Popular Resistance Committee has denied any involvement. However, the Israeli prime minister and other Israeli officials have pointed to the Popular Resistance Committee as the organization who carried out the attack. So, according to the ITIC, the fact that Netanyahu said something is proof enough, even if the other side completely denies it.
During the weekend, the news website Real News interviewed a senior IDF Spokesman officer, Lt. Col. Avital Leibovitz, who’s in charge of the IDF Spokesman with the international media. Leibowitz denied that the IDF connects the PRC to the attacks, said she was not responsible for that the prime minister said, but claimed that the attackers did come from Gaza, citing as proof the fact they were using Kalashnikov assault rifies (Sic! 2:28 and onwards in the video). I dunno how to put it to Col. Leibovitz, but Kalashnikovs are the most common light assault rifle in the world – a gift that keeps on giving from the defunct Soviet Union – and are rather easy to get all over the Middle East.
In a phone conversation with Leibovitz yesterday, she said “senior officials have already expressed themselves on the issue”, and declined to provide more information on the attackers, aside from insisting on them being Gazans. I asked her if she could provide me with the identity of the attackers killed by the IDF, which was until recently standard procedure, carried out within hours of an attack. She said this is unfortunately impossible, and repeatedly insisted they were Gazans. B’Tselem researchers in the Strip, contacted via B’Tselem today, were unaware of the identity of the attackers. Again, usually they are quickly identified and a mourners’ hut is rapidly constructed. They were killed on Thursday; if they resided in the Strip, their families would have heard of their deaths by now.
Yesterday evening the Egyptian newspaper Al Masry Al Youm reported that Egyptian security forces have identified three of the dead attackers. Egypt has a strong interest to claim the attackers were Gazans, since this would lessen its responsibility for the attacks; nevertheless, they say at least two of the attackers were known terrorists in the Sinai Peninsula. As far as I could find out, the rest of the bodies are in the hands of the IDF – which, again, does not reveal their identity.
And probably with good reason. After all, it seems Barak and Netanyahu pulled off a major disinformation campaign here, which the IDF (in the form of Colonel Leibovitz) has to cooperate with, somewhat unwillingly. They took us to a false war against the Gaza Strip. You can’t really blame Leibovitz: She’s a uniformed officer. She can’t contradict “senior officials [who] have already expressed themselves on the issue”.
Assuming no other reliable evidence shows up, which at the moment is doubtful, we must ask ourselves: Why did Barak and Netanyahu pull off what seems to be a major deception of the Israeli public, which puts to shame any such deception since the Abu Nidal group tried to assassinate Israel’s ambassador to Britain in 1982, Shlomo Argov. Sharon, Begin and Eitan needed a pretext to begin their war of deception in Lebanon – the bright idea of, under the guise of fighting the PLO, enthrone the friendly Maronites. When Eitan was informed that the assassins were Abu Nidal’s men, he replied with “Abu Nidal, Abu Shmidal – we need to screw the PLO.” That’s how it began.
None of the people responsible for that deception, which ended a 11-months old ceasefire and sparked 18 years of war in Lebanon, ever paid a price for it. Ehud Barak, then a young aluf¬ – major general – learned the lesson well. His part in planning the war was suggesting to Sharon that the IDF will attack the Syrians as well, admitting that such a move required the hoodwinking of the public. Sharon, while impressed, rejected the suggestion.
Now it looks – again, barring new evidence – that Barak and Natanyahu are selling us another lie, one which directs fire towards the Gaza Strip. Why? This is the question they must answer. They are, after all, still working for us, not the other way around – and this is precisely the sort of a spin which calls for a board of inquiry and for the separation of Ehud Barak’s body from his seat.
-------------------------
I am Yossi Gurvitz*, a 40-year old journalist, blogger and photographer.
I write for several Israeli publications, including the influential financial daily Calcalist and the Nana portal. In the past, I’ve been deputy editor of Nana News, and with Itamar Shaaltiel edited its 2006 Knesset elections section.
I was raised as an Orthodox Jew, graduated from a Yeshiva (Nehalim), but saw the light and turned atheist at about the age of 17. After the mandatory three years in the military, much more strictly enforced in 1988 than now, I studied history and classics, earning a BA degree, and studying three additional years towards an MA, but abandoned the project in favor of earning my living as a journalist. [It seemed a good idea at the time.]
Mostrando postagens com marcador B´Tselem. Mostrar todas as postagens
Mostrando postagens com marcador B´Tselem. Mostrar todas as postagens
quarta-feira, 24 de agosto de 2011
segunda-feira, 15 de agosto de 2011
NEW BOOK EXPOSES BRUTAL TREATMENT OF PALESTINIAN PRISONERS
5 August 2011, Jews for Justice for Palestinians http://jfjfp.com (Britain)
Source: The Electronic Intifada http://electronicintifada.net (USA)
Asa Winstanley*
Shlomo Gazit, an Israeli general and the first “coordinator of government activities” in the West Bank and Gaza Strip apparently wrote a book in 1985 about Israel’s occupation policies there called The Carrot and the Stick. It is quite telling that such Israeli terminology relates to Palestinians as if they are animals. A new book about Israel’s imprisonment of Palestinians contains strong evidence that these policies have been a lot more about the “stick” of physical and psychological torture than about the “carrot” of persuasion.
Threat: Palestinian Political Prisoners in Israel is a collection of essays from Pluto Press edited by Abeer Baker and Anat Matar. The contributors focus on different aspects of Israel’s system of political prisons. It is rare for such an anthology to be of such consistently high quality. Quite often essay collections can be a mixed bag but Threat is rarely less than interesting. Palestinian prisoners and the solidarity movements of their families and supporters have long been emblematic in the Palestinian liberation struggle. So the book is an important and welcome attempt to educate English-speakers on this neglected topic.
Consider, for example, this astonishing statistic: “almost half of all the prisoners held by the Israeli prison system are Palestinians who have been sent to prison by the military courts in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT)” (68). Furthermore, this share seems to have been consistently high over a long period: the figure stood between 45 and 60 percent during the first two decades after the 1967 occupation (72).
The contributors to this book are from a mix of Israeli, Palestinian and other backgrounds but most are lawyers, academics and professional activists for human rights groups in Israel such as Adalah (with whom Baker works as a lawyer) or B’Tselem. We can also read the words of Palestinian prisoners, recalling their own experiences.
We learn from Alon Harel and Yael Berda about what exactly “security prisoners” are. They are “deprived of many of the rights granted to non-security prisoners” (37). Yet the definition of “security prisoners” is not just those who engage in armed struggle — Palestinian political activists who do not use violence are also classified as such. Berda notes, “It is actually surprising how, under the harsh classification regimes of the security threat, many Palestinians have chosen nonviolent political and social action, even though it carries with it similar consequences to the violent actions” (54).
In reality, the Israeli secret police — the Shin Bet — decides who is a “security prisoner”. Known by its formal title the General Security Services (GSS), the Shin Bet runs a system that is “constructed and applied administratively by the GSS alone” (52). We also learn, in information relevant to the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement, that the closeness of Israeli universities to the Shin Bet has meant “merging the security apparatuses with bases of academic power” (52).
Apartheid behind bars
The prisoners are emblematic of the whole Palestinian struggle for many reasons, not least of which is the system of apartheid that they are fighting against. It is striking that this applied to the whole of historic Palestine, not just the occupied West Bank and Gaza. It applies to Palestinians living in Israel, too: “In January 2009, there were about 370 Israeli Arab citizens classified as security prisoners. A small number of Jewish prisoners are classified by the IPS [Israel Prison Service] as security prisoners but they are not subjected to the harsh conditions reserved for the Palestinians” (80).
Sharon Weill’s essay is a strong contender for best essay in the book. She proves that because of the separate and unequal legal systems for Israelis and Palestinians there — civil courts for Israeli Jews but military courts for Palestinians — the occupation of the West Bank is best understood as a system of apartheid. I was amazed to learn that “until 2004 the [Israeli military] judges did not need to have any legal background; they were just regular officers, usually very young” (147). She also includes a strong example of how Israeli apartheid applies to even its own (supposedly equal) Palestinian citizens: “While Israeli Jews have been excluded from the military courts’ jurisdiction as a matter of policy, Palestinians carrying Israeli IDs (especially those from East Jerusalem), committing an offense within the OPT, have always been tried there” (141).
Disturbing studies on torture and rape
There is a wide range of rich topics addressed. Palestinian sociology professor Nahla Abdo has a devastating critique of colonial feminism and the “Western Orientalist literature [that has since 2002] emerged to deal with the female military resistance” (59). Abdo shows how Western academics have tried to analyze female Palestinians fighters as a response to a supposed endemic misogyny in Palestinian society — to “wipe away the stigma of being female” as one has put it (59). She proceeds to convincingly dismantle this crude framework of assumptions. Abdo then moves on to sexism and racism in the Israel Prison Service and recounts disturbing case studies — from her own research and interviews with women prisoners — of sexual torture and rape by Israeli personnel.
If I have one reservation about the book it is its inevitable (considering the authors’ professional backgrounds) bias towards the “human rights” narrative, rather than the resistance narrative. For example, the failed case by the Israeli human rights organization Yesh Din against the practice of transferring Palestinians to prisons outside the West Bank cited by Israeli lawyer Michael Sfard seemed in effect to be arguing for Israeli prisons to be rebuilt in the West Bank (197-198). The Israeli high court rejected the Yesh Din petition on patronizing and spurious grounds. But the fact that a liberal Israeli human rights organization was not instead arguing for all the political prisons to be emptied exposes the contradictions and limits of such legal activism within the system of apartheid Zionism.
The editors — and some of the authors — seem to be aware of this to an extent, and Palestinian prisoner Walid Daka’s essay concluding the book is a good antidote in this regard, since it critiques this tendency. Daka sees the Palestinian Authority as key to this transformation: “the ‘Palestinian Revolution’ was replaced by the ‘Palestinian Authority,’ the mobilization of these young people [in the PA armed forces] signals the replacement of struggle with the ‘rule of law’ and ‘resistance’ with the ‘prevention of armed chaos’ … These new slogans do not belong to a discourse of a liberation movement; they were invoked to make the movement disappear” (238-239).
I would have liked to read more from Palestinian prisoners in their own words: 8 out of the 22 contributions in the book are by Palestinians (including Palestinian citizens of Israel) who are often former or current prisoners. But to be fair, those included offer deep and insightful historical analysis as well as important and troubling eyewitness accounts of torture and ill-treatment in Israeli prisons.
Overall, there is a wealth of history, analysis, documentation and plenty of legal details in this book. And fortunately, the legal details rarely lead into dry or unreadable territory. Threat comes highly recommended.
Asa Winstanley is a freelance journalist based in London who has lived in and reported from occupied Palestine. His first book Corporate Complicity in Israel’s
Occupation will be published by Pluto Press in October. His website is www.winstanleys.org.
Threat: Palestinian Political Prisoners in Israel
Manufacturer: Pluto Press
Part Number:
Price: $34.00
Source: The Electronic Intifada http://electronicintifada.net (USA)
Asa Winstanley*
Shlomo Gazit, an Israeli general and the first “coordinator of government activities” in the West Bank and Gaza Strip apparently wrote a book in 1985 about Israel’s occupation policies there called The Carrot and the Stick. It is quite telling that such Israeli terminology relates to Palestinians as if they are animals. A new book about Israel’s imprisonment of Palestinians contains strong evidence that these policies have been a lot more about the “stick” of physical and psychological torture than about the “carrot” of persuasion.
Threat: Palestinian Political Prisoners in Israel is a collection of essays from Pluto Press edited by Abeer Baker and Anat Matar. The contributors focus on different aspects of Israel’s system of political prisons. It is rare for such an anthology to be of such consistently high quality. Quite often essay collections can be a mixed bag but Threat is rarely less than interesting. Palestinian prisoners and the solidarity movements of their families and supporters have long been emblematic in the Palestinian liberation struggle. So the book is an important and welcome attempt to educate English-speakers on this neglected topic.
Consider, for example, this astonishing statistic: “almost half of all the prisoners held by the Israeli prison system are Palestinians who have been sent to prison by the military courts in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT)” (68). Furthermore, this share seems to have been consistently high over a long period: the figure stood between 45 and 60 percent during the first two decades after the 1967 occupation (72).
The contributors to this book are from a mix of Israeli, Palestinian and other backgrounds but most are lawyers, academics and professional activists for human rights groups in Israel such as Adalah (with whom Baker works as a lawyer) or B’Tselem. We can also read the words of Palestinian prisoners, recalling their own experiences.
We learn from Alon Harel and Yael Berda about what exactly “security prisoners” are. They are “deprived of many of the rights granted to non-security prisoners” (37). Yet the definition of “security prisoners” is not just those who engage in armed struggle — Palestinian political activists who do not use violence are also classified as such. Berda notes, “It is actually surprising how, under the harsh classification regimes of the security threat, many Palestinians have chosen nonviolent political and social action, even though it carries with it similar consequences to the violent actions” (54).
In reality, the Israeli secret police — the Shin Bet — decides who is a “security prisoner”. Known by its formal title the General Security Services (GSS), the Shin Bet runs a system that is “constructed and applied administratively by the GSS alone” (52). We also learn, in information relevant to the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement, that the closeness of Israeli universities to the Shin Bet has meant “merging the security apparatuses with bases of academic power” (52).
Apartheid behind bars
The prisoners are emblematic of the whole Palestinian struggle for many reasons, not least of which is the system of apartheid that they are fighting against. It is striking that this applied to the whole of historic Palestine, not just the occupied West Bank and Gaza. It applies to Palestinians living in Israel, too: “In January 2009, there were about 370 Israeli Arab citizens classified as security prisoners. A small number of Jewish prisoners are classified by the IPS [Israel Prison Service] as security prisoners but they are not subjected to the harsh conditions reserved for the Palestinians” (80).
Sharon Weill’s essay is a strong contender for best essay in the book. She proves that because of the separate and unequal legal systems for Israelis and Palestinians there — civil courts for Israeli Jews but military courts for Palestinians — the occupation of the West Bank is best understood as a system of apartheid. I was amazed to learn that “until 2004 the [Israeli military] judges did not need to have any legal background; they were just regular officers, usually very young” (147). She also includes a strong example of how Israeli apartheid applies to even its own (supposedly equal) Palestinian citizens: “While Israeli Jews have been excluded from the military courts’ jurisdiction as a matter of policy, Palestinians carrying Israeli IDs (especially those from East Jerusalem), committing an offense within the OPT, have always been tried there” (141).
Disturbing studies on torture and rape
There is a wide range of rich topics addressed. Palestinian sociology professor Nahla Abdo has a devastating critique of colonial feminism and the “Western Orientalist literature [that has since 2002] emerged to deal with the female military resistance” (59). Abdo shows how Western academics have tried to analyze female Palestinians fighters as a response to a supposed endemic misogyny in Palestinian society — to “wipe away the stigma of being female” as one has put it (59). She proceeds to convincingly dismantle this crude framework of assumptions. Abdo then moves on to sexism and racism in the Israel Prison Service and recounts disturbing case studies — from her own research and interviews with women prisoners — of sexual torture and rape by Israeli personnel.
If I have one reservation about the book it is its inevitable (considering the authors’ professional backgrounds) bias towards the “human rights” narrative, rather than the resistance narrative. For example, the failed case by the Israeli human rights organization Yesh Din against the practice of transferring Palestinians to prisons outside the West Bank cited by Israeli lawyer Michael Sfard seemed in effect to be arguing for Israeli prisons to be rebuilt in the West Bank (197-198). The Israeli high court rejected the Yesh Din petition on patronizing and spurious grounds. But the fact that a liberal Israeli human rights organization was not instead arguing for all the political prisons to be emptied exposes the contradictions and limits of such legal activism within the system of apartheid Zionism.
The editors — and some of the authors — seem to be aware of this to an extent, and Palestinian prisoner Walid Daka’s essay concluding the book is a good antidote in this regard, since it critiques this tendency. Daka sees the Palestinian Authority as key to this transformation: “the ‘Palestinian Revolution’ was replaced by the ‘Palestinian Authority,’ the mobilization of these young people [in the PA armed forces] signals the replacement of struggle with the ‘rule of law’ and ‘resistance’ with the ‘prevention of armed chaos’ … These new slogans do not belong to a discourse of a liberation movement; they were invoked to make the movement disappear” (238-239).
I would have liked to read more from Palestinian prisoners in their own words: 8 out of the 22 contributions in the book are by Palestinians (including Palestinian citizens of Israel) who are often former or current prisoners. But to be fair, those included offer deep and insightful historical analysis as well as important and troubling eyewitness accounts of torture and ill-treatment in Israeli prisons.
Overall, there is a wealth of history, analysis, documentation and plenty of legal details in this book. And fortunately, the legal details rarely lead into dry or unreadable territory. Threat comes highly recommended.
Asa Winstanley is a freelance journalist based in London who has lived in and reported from occupied Palestine. His first book Corporate Complicity in Israel’s
Occupation will be published by Pluto Press in October. His website is www.winstanleys.org.
Threat: Palestinian Political Prisoners in Israel
Manufacturer: Pluto Press
Part Number:
Price: $34.00
segunda-feira, 18 de julho de 2011
Israel convicts most stone-throwing Palestinian children, right group says
18 July 2011, Haaretz הארץ (Israel)
B’Tselem says nearly 100% of Palestinian children charged with rock-throwing are convicted, because of overwhelming pressure to plea bargain.
By Anshel Pfeffer
Only one Palestinian minor of 853 charged with rock-throwing between 2005-2010 was acquitted, according to a new report by the human rights group B’Tselem.
B’Tselem based its report, which is being released Monday, on data it obtained from the Israel Defense Forces spokesman about minors who were arrested during those six years and charged solely with rock-throwing; it does not relate to those charged with other crimes.
The nearly 100-percent conviction rate stems from, among other things, the willingness of the detainees to plead guilty as part of a plea agreement, the report says. The pressure to plead guilty is great, because generally minors charged with throwing rocks are held in custody until the end of legal proceedings; a regular trial could keep them detained for longer than the sentence they receive after pleading guilty, which is usually no more than a few months.
Of the 853 arrested, 18 were aged 12-13 and 255 were 14-15.
Sixty percent of the 12-13 year-olds received prison terms ranging from a few days to up to two months.
Fifteen percent of all the minors served terms of more than six months and 1 percent served longer than a year.
Because of the frequency of these incidents, B’Tselem was not able to get an exact tally of how many had actually occurred in the West Bank during those years. The Judea and Samaria police reported 2,100 to 3,000 incidents annually during those years, while the IDF Spokesman reported 3,600 to 4,300 incidents each year.
Nor could B’Tselem ascertain how many minors had been detained by the security forces for stone-throwing but were let go without being charged.
Because military law does not afford minors the same rights that they have under Israeli law, in many of the cases B’Tselem investigated, the minors were arrested at night, were not allowed to be accompanied by a parent or other adult when arrested, and were brought before a judge only eight days after being taken into custody.
“In terms of numbers, the [B’Tselem] report is not accurate, because during this period, I personally acquitted a number of minors,” said one judge in the army reserves, who dealt with many cases of stone-throwing minors.
“But there’s no doubt that it reflects a very problematic situation. Nearly all minors are convicted of stone-throwing because they have no choice but to sign a plea agreement, for which the punishment is usually between one to three months, and if they go to evidence they’ll sit longer. The High Court has ruled that anyone throwing stones at a person or vehicle can be remanded until the end of legal proceedings.
“Of course, it’s terrible that they arrest them in the middle of the night and question them without lawyers,” the judge said. “Sometimes this provides an impetus to release them. But there should be a legal mechanism under which a minor who throws stones for the first time and doesn’t hurt anyone can be released, and for the responsibility of probation to be imposed on the father, who will have to keep an eye on him.”
The IDF Spokesman, in a detailed response to B’Tselem, wrote: “Although legal systems that are established under military law do not include special arrangements for judging minors, over the past year a youth court has been established that improves the defense of minors’ rights.
“The Military Youth Court protects minors’ rights, allows the minors to be heard without adults present, gives more freedom of expression to the minors and allows for a broader discussion of parental responsibility as a substitute for punishment.”
The IDF Spokesman added that although it had asked B’Tselem to deal with the issue of judging minors in a fair and complete fashion, and had given B’Tselem information about 160 cases in which minors who were used by terror groups to carry out serious terror attacks, “the group chose not to deal with the issue of judging minors in a balanced manner and did not deal with the use of minors by terror groups in a fashion that violates human rights and contravenes international law.”
B’Tselem says nearly 100% of Palestinian children charged with rock-throwing are convicted, because of overwhelming pressure to plea bargain.
By Anshel Pfeffer
Only one Palestinian minor of 853 charged with rock-throwing between 2005-2010 was acquitted, according to a new report by the human rights group B’Tselem.
B’Tselem based its report, which is being released Monday, on data it obtained from the Israel Defense Forces spokesman about minors who were arrested during those six years and charged solely with rock-throwing; it does not relate to those charged with other crimes.
The nearly 100-percent conviction rate stems from, among other things, the willingness of the detainees to plead guilty as part of a plea agreement, the report says. The pressure to plead guilty is great, because generally minors charged with throwing rocks are held in custody until the end of legal proceedings; a regular trial could keep them detained for longer than the sentence they receive after pleading guilty, which is usually no more than a few months.
Of the 853 arrested, 18 were aged 12-13 and 255 were 14-15.
Sixty percent of the 12-13 year-olds received prison terms ranging from a few days to up to two months.
Fifteen percent of all the minors served terms of more than six months and 1 percent served longer than a year.
Because of the frequency of these incidents, B’Tselem was not able to get an exact tally of how many had actually occurred in the West Bank during those years. The Judea and Samaria police reported 2,100 to 3,000 incidents annually during those years, while the IDF Spokesman reported 3,600 to 4,300 incidents each year.
Nor could B’Tselem ascertain how many minors had been detained by the security forces for stone-throwing but were let go without being charged.
Because military law does not afford minors the same rights that they have under Israeli law, in many of the cases B’Tselem investigated, the minors were arrested at night, were not allowed to be accompanied by a parent or other adult when arrested, and were brought before a judge only eight days after being taken into custody.
“In terms of numbers, the [B’Tselem] report is not accurate, because during this period, I personally acquitted a number of minors,” said one judge in the army reserves, who dealt with many cases of stone-throwing minors.
“But there’s no doubt that it reflects a very problematic situation. Nearly all minors are convicted of stone-throwing because they have no choice but to sign a plea agreement, for which the punishment is usually between one to three months, and if they go to evidence they’ll sit longer. The High Court has ruled that anyone throwing stones at a person or vehicle can be remanded until the end of legal proceedings.
“Of course, it’s terrible that they arrest them in the middle of the night and question them without lawyers,” the judge said. “Sometimes this provides an impetus to release them. But there should be a legal mechanism under which a minor who throws stones for the first time and doesn’t hurt anyone can be released, and for the responsibility of probation to be imposed on the father, who will have to keep an eye on him.”
The IDF Spokesman, in a detailed response to B’Tselem, wrote: “Although legal systems that are established under military law do not include special arrangements for judging minors, over the past year a youth court has been established that improves the defense of minors’ rights.
“The Military Youth Court protects minors’ rights, allows the minors to be heard without adults present, gives more freedom of expression to the minors and allows for a broader discussion of parental responsibility as a substitute for punishment.”
The IDF Spokesman added that although it had asked B’Tselem to deal with the issue of judging minors in a fair and complete fashion, and had given B’Tselem information about 160 cases in which minors who were used by terror groups to carry out serious terror attacks, “the group chose not to deal with the issue of judging minors in a balanced manner and did not deal with the use of minors by terror groups in a fashion that violates human rights and contravenes international law.”
sábado, 18 de junho de 2011
New B'Tselem Video Project: East Jerusalem Diaries
13 June 2011, B´Tselem בצלם http://www.btselem.org (USA)
Dear Supporter,
I'm pleased to share B'Tselem's latest project with you, launched last week.
"East Jerusalem: Six Voices" is the result of an innovative collaboration between B'Tselem and The Guardian newspaper, in which five Palestinians and two Israelis created personal video diaries about the human rights' reality in East Jerusalem. Click here to watch "East Jerusalem: Six Voices."
What today we call East Jerusalem is an area of 27 square miles, most of which was part of the West Bank before 1967. Israel illegally annexed this whole area to Jerusalem's municipal borders and built twelve large settlements (or neighborhoods as they are called in the Israeli parlance). In addition, over the years, Israelis have taken over houses in dozens of spots in the heart of Palestinian neighborhoods (you can read much more about the complex human rights reality in East Jerusalem here).
While East Jerusalem is recognized as crucial to any resolution of the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, too often the diplomatic conversation ignores the daily reality of the people living here. News that settlers have taken over a building in the Muslim Quarter of the Old City may be broadcast throughout the world – but who knows about the absurd reality that this has created for the Qirresh family? Activists in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood have focused international attention on the eviction of families there – but how does these evictions look through the eyes of 12-year-old Muna and Muhammad al-Qurd? And what motivated Sara Benninga to take a lead role among Israeli activists advocating for their cause?
As part of B'Tselem's work to promote human rights in the Occupied Territories, we aim to give faces and voices to what otherwise may remain abstract violations. People living in East Jerusalem, in the West Bank and in the Gaza Strip should be heard, not only as victims of human rights abuses but also as human beings navigating a complex reality. The partnership with the leading British daily The Guardian ensures that these personal stories engage as wide an audience as possible.
I invite you to share these video diaries with your friends and colleagues, helping to draw attention to the concrete reality in East Jerusalem, too often obscured by lofty symbolism.
Sincerely,
Jessica Montell
Executive Director
B´Tselem USA E-mail USA@btselem.org
----------------
From WIKIPEDIA
B'Tselem (em hebraico: בצלם, "à imagem de", alusivo ao versículo 1:27 do Gênesis) é uma organização não governamental israelense. B'Tselem refere-se a si propria como "o centro de informações israelense para os direitos humanos nos territórios ocupados".
A organização foi fundada em 3 de fevereiro de 1989 por um grupo de personalidades públicas de Israel - advogados, acadêmicos, jornalistas e membros do Knesset. Sua atual diretora executiva é Jessica Montell.
Os objetivos declarados da B'Tselem são "documentar e educar o público e os políticos israelenses sobre as violações dos direitos humanos cometidas pelo Estado de Israel nos territórios ocupados, empenhar-se na luta contra o fenômeno da negação entre os cidadãos israelenses e contribuir para criar uma cultura de direitos humanos em Israel."
Em dezembro de 1989 a organização recebeu o Prêmio Carter-Menil de Direitos Humanos.
B'Tselem é financiada por contribuições provenientes de diversas organizações de direitos humanos da Europa e da América do Norte.
Dear Supporter,
I'm pleased to share B'Tselem's latest project with you, launched last week.
"East Jerusalem: Six Voices" is the result of an innovative collaboration between B'Tselem and The Guardian newspaper, in which five Palestinians and two Israelis created personal video diaries about the human rights' reality in East Jerusalem. Click here to watch "East Jerusalem: Six Voices."
What today we call East Jerusalem is an area of 27 square miles, most of which was part of the West Bank before 1967. Israel illegally annexed this whole area to Jerusalem's municipal borders and built twelve large settlements (or neighborhoods as they are called in the Israeli parlance). In addition, over the years, Israelis have taken over houses in dozens of spots in the heart of Palestinian neighborhoods (you can read much more about the complex human rights reality in East Jerusalem here).
While East Jerusalem is recognized as crucial to any resolution of the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, too often the diplomatic conversation ignores the daily reality of the people living here. News that settlers have taken over a building in the Muslim Quarter of the Old City may be broadcast throughout the world – but who knows about the absurd reality that this has created for the Qirresh family? Activists in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood have focused international attention on the eviction of families there – but how does these evictions look through the eyes of 12-year-old Muna and Muhammad al-Qurd? And what motivated Sara Benninga to take a lead role among Israeli activists advocating for their cause?
As part of B'Tselem's work to promote human rights in the Occupied Territories, we aim to give faces and voices to what otherwise may remain abstract violations. People living in East Jerusalem, in the West Bank and in the Gaza Strip should be heard, not only as victims of human rights abuses but also as human beings navigating a complex reality. The partnership with the leading British daily The Guardian ensures that these personal stories engage as wide an audience as possible.
I invite you to share these video diaries with your friends and colleagues, helping to draw attention to the concrete reality in East Jerusalem, too often obscured by lofty symbolism.
Sincerely,
Jessica Montell
Executive Director
B´Tselem USA E-mail USA@btselem.org
----------------
From WIKIPEDIA
B'Tselem (em hebraico: בצלם, "à imagem de", alusivo ao versículo 1:27 do Gênesis) é uma organização não governamental israelense. B'Tselem refere-se a si propria como "o centro de informações israelense para os direitos humanos nos territórios ocupados".
A organização foi fundada em 3 de fevereiro de 1989 por um grupo de personalidades públicas de Israel - advogados, acadêmicos, jornalistas e membros do Knesset. Sua atual diretora executiva é Jessica Montell.
Os objetivos declarados da B'Tselem são "documentar e educar o público e os políticos israelenses sobre as violações dos direitos humanos cometidas pelo Estado de Israel nos territórios ocupados, empenhar-se na luta contra o fenômeno da negação entre os cidadãos israelenses e contribuir para criar uma cultura de direitos humanos em Israel."
Em dezembro de 1989 a organização recebeu o Prêmio Carter-Menil de Direitos Humanos.
B'Tselem é financiada por contribuições provenientes de diversas organizações de direitos humanos da Europa e da América do Norte.
Assinar:
Postagens (Atom)