tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-59031370444727345002023-11-16T07:06:07.943-08:00Resisting OccupationAn American Perspective on the Struggle for Freedom in PalestineMaggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.comBlogger26125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5903137044472734500.post-11987212092579552742012-03-22T21:20:00.001-07:002012-03-22T21:25:36.644-07:00Understanding the Palestinian Refugee Crisis<div class="MsoNormal"><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://electronicintifada.net/sites/electronicintifada.net/files/artman2/2/080309-ziad.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="227" src="http://electronicintifada.net/sites/electronicintifada.net/files/artman2/2/080309-ziad.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Abbas interviewing Palestinian Girls in his refugee camp</td></tr>
</tbody></table>Last night I had the pleasure of watching Ziad Abbas of the Middle East Children’s alliance address a full room of students at City College of San Francisco with his presentation, “Cultural Resistance of Marginality: a Personal Perspective on the Untold Stories of Palestinian Refugees.” I had seen Ziad’s slideshow once previously, at a <a href="http://resistingoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/03/educating-our-children-about-palestine.html">workshop for educators and community organizers</a> on how to teach the history of the conflict, but this time it evoked much stronger emotions in me than before. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Perhaps because most of the students in the room were still raw with emotion from seeing a performance of <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/16/theater/16chur.html?_r=3&8dpc">Seven Jewish Children</a> given in the school library just a few minutes before, or maybe because the presentation was so deeply personal, Ziad clearly struck a nerve. I saw tears well up in the eyes of people I couldn’t have dreamed would still be paying attention after nearly two hours, and hands spring into the air with questions that betrayed a level of critical thinking and understanding that can only manifest when one’s attention is truly gripped. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">In his presentation Ziad flows seamlessly between historical lessons and personal narrative, flashing from a map of Palestine in 1878 marking the first Zionist settlement to a picture of the small tent his mother, father, brother, and sister called home in the first weeks after they were forced from their village of Zakariyya. He shows pictures from the Israeli archive opened in the late 1990s –a village being blown to bits after it was cleared, a group of Hagana soldiers leaning against their military vehicle, a trail of men, women, and children saddled with blankets and baskets as they walk into the distance. The last one, he says, reminds him of his mother. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">“She locked the door behind her and left our house barefoot, one child on her hip as she took the other by the hand, thinking she’d be back as soon as the fighting ended.”* </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">He calls her naïve, exhaling warmly.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Next he moves to images of Palestinians, some trying to escape the fighting on their own, some being forcibly transferred. He lingers on one in particular. In it we see ragged-looking men and women sitting in a tattered bus as tidy, uniformed Jewish soldiers stand guard nearby, guns slung over their shoulders. He turns to us and asks, “What does this remind you of?” A girl I know, unfamiliar with the conflict, shouts, “The Holocaust. The trains.” I’m shocked. How obvious it all is to those with new eyes. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTPNZ89NHyZeQcGC3rs_eimpDlpN9Q8PbE6-tYf_cTm2YIJdLrJRVxpnQoG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTPNZ89NHyZeQcGC3rs_eimpDlpN9Q8PbE6-tYf_cTm2YIJdLrJRVxpnQoG" /></a></div>He speaks of the UN making the decision to turn the tents in his Dheisheh refugee camp into brick and mortar rooms, each about 81 square feet and housing at minimum six people. Every few hundred rooms had two bathrooms, one for women and the other for men. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">“We felt like we were always waiting,” he said, “waiting in line for food, waiting in line for the bathroom. Waiting, waiting, waiting.” </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">And he tells us that when the Abbas family finally got their own private bathroom years later, there was a celebration. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">He talks about how difficult it was to live under curfew, especially in the beginning when there was no running water, no electricity. Even after these luxuries became commonplace it wasn’t easy. From 1979 to 1995, refugees in his camp spent nearly 4 months out of every year locked down. The longest single stretch happened during the Gulf War; it was 49 days. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Despite these hardships, Ziad has clearly kept his sense of humor. He laughs when he explains how when he got into particularly bad fights with his mother he would run outside and throw stones at his own house in protest, or how every time he had to escort his older sister to the communal bathroom he would ask for change in return. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">“It’s how I made my income!” he jokes. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">The most moving part of the presentation comes when he begins to delineate the role of the Jewish National Fund in “<a href="http://www.stopthejnf.org/callforaction.html">greenwashing</a>” Palestine’s ethnic cleansing. He shows a picture of Zakariyya in the 1920’s, and points out the empty hills rolling into the distance. Then he shows a current view of the same village, the hills now covered in non-indigenous trees, the houses gone. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Next he flashes to a sign for a nature reserve. The upper portion is written in Hebrew, but below you can read in English, “Funded in part by a congregation in Kansas City, Missouri.”</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">“We call it the Israeli-American occupation, sometimes. You see why.” </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Here the mood becomes even darker as he tells us in a somber tone that his uncle passed away only two days ago. He was the last person in his family from the “catastrophe generation” as Ziad calls it, referring to those who actually lived through the 1947-48 cleansing. He recalls the time he smuggled his uncle into Israel to see their village a few years ago. By this time his uncle was quite old, and so when he started pointing to forests and nature reserves, giving them Arabic names and describing the villages that used to stand in their stead, Ziad first thought he was simply confused. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">“You’re turned around, that’s all. We’ll find our way.” </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">When his uncle insisted that the reserve they were standing on was in fact Ziad’s mother’s village, Ziad thought the old man had lost it. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">“No!” He bellowed, shaking his head, wringing his hands. “No! This. Is. The. Village!” </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Here Ziad becomes very quiet. I realize he isn’t looking at us anymore, but somewhere above our heads. I close my eyes and imagine the scene.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">“The stones, the trees, they all started speaking. My uncle is an artist you see, and he listened. Within 30 minutes the village stood before us, as clear as if we had lived there our whole lives. He described the house, the window, the view from the front steps. I saw it all. And then we started digging. I found that step buried in the ground, that first step. I stood on it, imagining what my mother saw as a girl every morning.” </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">He called it life-altering. I bit my lip to stop from weeping at the thought of it. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">He focused the rest of his energy that night on resistance, showing us pictures taken in and around Dheisheh. As I saw boy after boy bravely stare down tanks and armored soldiers, their childish hands clasped around rocks, their shoulders strong and defiant, I felt ashamed. How could I be such a coward? How could I ever let something as silly as the fear of offending someone stop me from raising my voice, when here stood these little children, fighting against the oppression of the longest occupation in modern history with their bare hands?<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.bintjbeil.com/images/slide/020705_deheishe_boy.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="416" src="http://www.bintjbeil.com/images/slide/020705_deheishe_boy.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br />
<br />
More moving than that was the video he showed us, made by a young girl named Zainab. She wasn’t interested in rocks at all. No, Zainab wanted to become a lawyer, “to give rights back to the Palestinian people.” She was so precious, she reminded me of my baby sister. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">I became enraged. How could anyone deny her anything, let alone her basic human rights? As if reading my mind, Ziad finished his presentation with these words: </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">“We aren’t interested in peace. We are interested in justice. And we aren’t asking for miracles, or even anything special. We are asking for what was given to us by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and by resolution 194. There are nearly 7 million Palestinian refugees now. We cannot be ignored.” </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">*Quotes are not 100% exact but taken from notes</div>Maggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5903137044472734500.post-40432302180634664672011-10-29T22:14:00.000-07:002011-10-29T22:41:36.391-07:00Ethical Oil: The Canadian Oil Industry and the Israel Connection<div class="MsoNormal">Last month I discovered a piece on <a href="http://community.feministing.com/2011/09/14/my-feminism-my-planet/">Feministing</a> about a recent Canadian ad campaign for Ethical Oil. According to Ethical Oil’s <a href="http://www.ethicaloil.org/about/">website</a>, the group:</div><div style="margin-left: .5in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-left: 0.5in;">Encourages people, businesses and governments to choose Ethical Oil from Canada, its oil sands and other liberal democracies. Unlike Conflict Oil from some of the world’s most politically oppressive and environmentally reckless regimes, Ethical Oil is the “Fair Trade” choice in oil. Countries that produce Ethical Oil protect the rights of women, workers, indigenous peoples and other minorities including gays and lesbians. Conflict Oil regimes, by contrast, oppress their citizens and operate in secret with no accountability to voters, the press or independent judiciaries.</div><div style="margin-left: 0.5in;"><br />
</div><a href="http://www.treehugger.com/20110729-ethical-oil-campaign.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="250" src="http://www.treehugger.com/20110729-ethical-oil-campaign.jpg" width="400" /></a>The group’s now infamous ad, which can be seen <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SjZlqbDudI&feature=player_embedded&noredirect=1">here</a>, speaks of the abuse women endure in Saudi Arabia, and paints Canada’s environmentally disastrous tar sands as the only alternative. But intelligent women aren’t falling for it. <a href="http://community.feministing.com/2011/09/14/my-feminism-my-planet/">As one blogger puts it</a>, “I am a feminist and I am an environmentalist. I don’t really appreciate being asked to compromise one to support the other….If Ethical Oil was truly interested in women’s rights, they’d be campaign for fuel efficiency standards. Instead they’re using the condition of Saudi women as a disgusting gateway to destroying the planet and encouraging an environmental disaster.” <br />
<br />
The ad currently runs on Oprah’s OWN network. Upon discovering this, the exceptionally thorough environmentalist and writer Emma Pullman did some investigative work and found the following, which she then included in <a href="http://desmogblog.com/open-letter-oprah-winfrey-ethical-oil-ads">an open letter to Ms. Winfrey</a> (the article also does an amazing job of unraveling the absurd logic Ethical Oil operates by): <br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">According to <a href="http://deepclimate.org/2011/09/01/the-institute/" target="_blank">Deep Climate</a>, Ethical Oil isn't the low budget grassroots organization it purports to be. Its principals are some of the rising stars of the conservative movement in Canada, and one is a lawyer for tar sands firms. </blockquote><blockquote class="tr_bq">Here's the back story: Ezra Levant turned "ethical oil" into a <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/why-we-need-stop-calling-tar-sands-oil-ethical-oil">meme</a> late last year. Almost overnight, pro-industry and government officials, keen to sell the filthy oil to a skeptical public, picked up the term and ran with it. After the Conservative election victory in May, Conservative government spokesperson (and former <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Enterprise_Institute" target="_blank">American Enterprise Institute</a> intern) <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ethical-oil-ad-campaign/article2112295/" target="_blank">Alykhan Velshi </a>took over at the helm of the <a href="http://ethicaloil.org/" target="_blank"><span style="color: #114170;">ethicaloil.org</span></a> blog. The blog is <a href="http://www.whois.net/whois/ethicaloil.org" target="_blank">registered to Levant</a>, who also has strong links to the Conservatives.<br />
<br />
And, here's another thing that just doesn't add up for me. How is it that a former advisor to Environment Minister John Baird, and communications director for Immigration Minister Jason Kenney, would find himself taking an <a href="http://www.thehilltimes.ca/page/view/climbers-06-27-2011" target="_blank">"unpaid" job</a> as a blogger?<br />
<br />
Thanks to the folks over at Deep Climate, it makes a lot more sense. EthicalOil.org is connected to the obscure <a href="http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/gazette/2011/text/08_Apr30_Registrar.cfm" target="_blank">Ethical Oil Institute</a>. Though there is scant reference to them online, according to their <a href="http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/gazette/2011/pdf/08_Apr30_Registrar.pdf" target="_blank">notice of incorporation</a>, the institute was registered on March 9, 2011 to an Edmonton address, 12220 Stony Plain Road, Edmonton <span class="caps">AB</span> <span class="caps">T5N</span> 3Y4. <i> </i><br />
<br />
That just so happens to be the address of the law firm <a href="http://www.mross.com/law/ViewPage.action?ran=-934689025" target="_blank">McLennan Ross</a>. McLennan Ross makes bathtubs full of money doing work for tar sands firms.<br />
<br />
The two members of the Ethical Oil Institute's board of directors are Ezra Levant and McLellan Ross partner <a href="http://www.oilsandslaw.com/live/Our+Lawyers/Lawyer+Info?contentId=106" target="_blank"><span style="color: #114170;">Thomas Ross</span></a>. Thomas Ross is one of <a href="http://www.oilsandslaw.com/live/ViewPage.action" target="_blank"><span style="color: #114170;">ten lead partners in McLellan Ross’s OilSandsLaw.com initiative</span></a>, a “<a href="http://www.oilsandslaw.com/live/digitalAssets/0/93_Can_Lawyer_Oilsands_article_July_2009.pdf" target="_blank">slick new oilsands cross-selling strategy</a>" and marketing campaign.</blockquote>But it gets better. Pullman mentioned that Alykhan Velshi also contributes to the group. In fact, Ethical Oil openly states this, saying the site “began as a blog created by Alykhan Velshi.” More than simply an “intern for the American Enterprise Institute,” Velshi was also head of research at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, where he co-founded the Center for Law and Counterterrorism. He is an open supporter of Bush’s doctrine of pre-emptive war, <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/218629/whos-really-ignoring-geneva-conventions/alykhan-velshi">does not believe the Geneva Conventions should apply</a> to those captured in the War on Terror, and advocates the creation of a special National Security Court to try terrorism suspects.<br />
<br />
More importantly, Velshi is an open and unabashed Zionist, working for Canadian Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Jason Kenney as his Director of Communications and Parliamentary Affairs. You might recall that Kenney made the news in 2009 as he was embroiled in a battle with Canadian Arab Federation president Khaled Mouammar in which Kenney and Velshi were able to successfully defund CAF after comments Mouammar made criticizing Kenney’s support for Operation Cast Lead. According to Velshi, Mouammar was “anti-Semetic.” See <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Arab_Federation#Dispute_with_Jason_Kenney_and_Federal_funding">here</a> for the full story. <br />
<br />
And there's more. Writing for the Huffington Post, Velshi <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/alykhan-velshi/ethical-oil-saudis_b_969786.html">criticized</a> the Saudi government’s attempt to get Ethical Oil’s ad off the air, explaining: <br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">I have also alerted Foreign Minister John Baird and Dean Allison, Chairman of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade, about the incident in writing, calling on the Harper government and the parliamentary committee to investigate a foreign dictatorship trying to censor what Canadians can and cannot see on their televisions.<br />
<br />
While in a free, open, and democratic society, we can have vigorous disagreements about energy policy and the role Canada's oil sands should play in the energy supply mix, when a foreign dictatorship like Saudi Arabia tries to censor one side of that debate, we all need to stand as one in defending our rights as Canadians. That means that all of us -- including oil sands critics like Greenpeace -- need to condemn this brazen act of domestic political interference by a blood-soaked, conflict oil-fueled foreign dictatorship.</blockquote>Wait, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">what? </i>Need I remind you, this is the same man who played an instrumental role in successfully banning British PM and outspoken Israel critic George Galloway from entering Canada. From <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alykhan_Velshi#March_2009_controversies">wiki</a>: <br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">Velshi told the media that the Canadian government would not reverse this decision, stating that Galloway had expressed sympathy for the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban" title="Taliban">Taliban</a> cause in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan" title="Afghanistan">Afghanistan</a> and describing him as an "infandous street-corner <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Cromwell" title="Oliver Cromwell">Cromwell</a> who actually brags about giving 'financial support' to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas" title="Hamas">Hamas</a>, a terrorist organisation banned in Canada.<sup id="cite_ref-32"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alykhan_Velshi#cite_note-32">[33]</a></sup> The decision to ban Galloway was supported by the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Jewish_Congress" title="Canadian Jewish Congress">Canadian Jewish Congress</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%27nai_Brith_Canada" title="B'nai Brith Canada">B'nai Brith Canada</a> and the far-right <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Defence_League" title="Jewish Defence League">Jewish Defence League</a> of Canada, which took credit for initiating the action.<sup id="cite_ref-33"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alykhan_Velshi#cite_note-33">[34]</a></sup> It was subsequently noted that Velshi had begun preparing media lines regarding Galloway several days before the ban was announced.<sup id="cite_ref-Alexander_Panetta_2009_31-1"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alykhan_Velshi#cite_note-Alexander_Panetta_2009-31">[32]</a> </sup></blockquote>The Canadian border police would not let Galloway into the country based on instructions from Velshi. Now tell me again, what did he say about free speech and debate? <br />
<br />
I guess Velshi has no sense of irony. Either that, or he’s just a hypocrite. A neoconservative Zionist taking talking points from the Canadian Jewish Congress and B’nai Birth Canada, which act as in part as agents of Israel to insulate its “blood-soaked” apartheid regime from Western criticism has the gall to talk about other countries meddling in Canadian affairs. What exactly is his angle here? <br />
<br />
In truth, Ethical Oil is guilty of myriad hasbara-esque techniques, among them greenwashing, pinkwashing, and the old familiar but-look-at-those-evil-Arabs-over-THERE excuse by comparison, except this time they're in the service of Canada rather than Israel. But these obfuscations don't work for Israel, and they shouldn't work for Canada either.Maggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5903137044472734500.post-39930985122467890202011-03-02T01:05:00.000-08:002011-03-02T10:34:36.525-08:00Educating Our Children About Palestine<div class="MsoNormal">According to a <a href="http://www.gallup.com/poll/146408/Americans-Maintain-Broad-Support-Israel.aspx">recent Gallup Poll</a>, only 17% of Americans sympathize with Palestinians over Israelis, whereas 63% favor Israelis. What’s more, the percentage of neutral individuals is shrinking in favor of Israel. Taking into account the events of the past three years, Operation Cast Lead and subsequent findings of <a href="http://www.goldstonereportbook.com/report.php">war crimes/crimes against humanity,</a> the <a href="http://www.resistingoccupation.com/2010/09/idf-most-moral-army-in-world.html">attack on the Freedom Flotilla</a>, and the <a href="http://mondoweiss.net/2010/09/makovsky-obama-will-give-it-up-for-israel-for-a-two-month-freeze-extension.html">refusal</a> to halt illegal settlement activity even when bribed, how could it be that the number of Americans sympathizing with Israel is at its highest since the beginning of the fruitless peace process 20 years ago? Clearly something is amiss. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Knowing what I know about Palestine, it is hard to understand how anyone could ignore the damage of occupation, siege and dispossession, choosing instead to sympathize with the perpetrators of violence. Even more disturbing are the consequences of these sympathies on Palestinians’ everyday lives. Every year the United States gives Israel nearly three billion dollars in aid, which Israel then uses to continue the systematic abridgment of Palestinian rights. Without losing my faith in humanity, the only conclusion I can draw from Gallup’s findings is that most Americans are simply mis/uninformed. Otherwise, how can it be so difficult to comprehend Palestinian plight? Why can't we understand that apartheid is just as wrong in South Africa as it is in the occupied West Bank? Why do we implicitly recognize the injustice of racism against African Americans but excuse Israel when it characterizes its Arab minority as a demographic threat? Why do we champion our 2nd amendment right to defend ourselves but castigate Palestinian children for throwing stones at the soldiers who come to take their land? I can only hope that the answer to these questions is simply that no one ever thought of things this way. Something must be done to change mainstream attitudes, not so that we care for Palestinians and not Israelis, but rather so that sympathizing with Israel does not come at the expense of Palestinian life. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Within this context, I attended a workshop last weekend aimed at educators and organizers interested in learning effective methods for raising the issue of Palestine with their students and community. Spearheaded by the <a href="http://www.mecaforpeace.org/">Middle East Children’s Alliance</a>, the <a href="http://www.ijsn.net/home/">International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network</a> and <a href="http://www.rethinkingschools.org/about/index.shtml">Rethinking Schools</a>, the half-day workshop focused on techniques to incorporate Palestine into curriculums in a constructive and educational way that also facilitates the development of critical thinking skills. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Due to the highly controversial nature of the Israel-Palestine conflict among other factors, many school districts avoid the subject entirely. This leaves American students without a lens to interpret key historical developments within the Middle East, including our own military involvement. At the same time they are also exceptionally susceptible to Israeli propaganda and mainstream media bias, all of which contribute to the perpetuation of Palestinian suffering. However, the workshop does not aim to equip teachers with the tools to simply indoctrinate students for Palestine or against Israel. Instead, they are instructed on how to create an environment that values justice, equality and factual accuracy where resistance struggles of all types can be understood and identified with. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Naturally, part of the discussion centered on fears of possible backlash from students’ parents. Two techniques were offered to mitigate these fears. The first was making sure that any lesson that mentions Palestine is perfectly relevant to the unit at hand, so that it can be defended on the grounds that it is an integral component of reaching an educational standard. The second was to implement the paradigm of “dual perspectives.” Various perspectives on a given event are presented, after which they are examined for legitimacy and their conformity to fact. In this way conflicting viewpoints are offered so students do not see a one-sided picture of things, thereby undercutting accusations of bias. At the same time, an emphasis on factual accuracy dictates that the side which best conforms to reality prevails. When developed within a framework that values social justice and equality, this method of appraisal results in a deeper understanding of Palestinian plight. Most importantly, this understanding manifests organically. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">For example, Israel offers the perspective that the Separation Wall is necessary for the security of the State whereas Palestinians find it to be an unjust imposition. These positions seem irreconcilable. However, upon further scrutiny one sees that the route of the wall attests more to a land-grab than to improve Israeli security, thus delegitimizing the former point of view.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Instructors were encouraged to draw parallels between the concepts familiar to students and Palestinian history. These included: </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc"><li class="MsoNormal">Manifest Destiny and Eretz Israel</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">The ethnic cleansing of native Americans and the Nakba </li>
<li class="MsoNormal">South African Apartheid and the different legal systems for Israeli settlers vs. Palestinians in the West Bank</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">The Civil Rights struggle and the situation for Israeli Arabs</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">Water conservation and Israel’s unfair allocation of resources</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">Racial profiling and Israel’s system of checkpoints</li>
</ul><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Teachers also discussed including Palestinian artists, writers and poets in their humanities units to familiarize students with Palestinian culture. Some even suggested putting their students in contact with Palestinian youth by partnering classrooms together and facilitating pen pal programs.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Non-educators found that the most effective way to garner strength for Palestine solidarity was by illustrating common needs and concerns within their communities and those in Palestine. By drawing connections between all social struggles, whether for immigrant rights, women’s rights, LGBT rights, indigenous rights, etc, we can see that the injustice suffered by Palestinians is not something too complex, foreign or removed to understand. Once that barrier is broken, a desire to end the occupation naturally springs forth. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">With every day that passes, the occupation of Palestine and the perpetuation of the diaspora cause untold suffering. The United States is complicit in this crime. It is imperative that we do all we can to change the situation. By educating our children and our communities on the values of critical examination, justice, equality, and compassion we move one step forward. We owe it to them to raise this issue, confident in the knowledge that we are on the right side of history.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">If you are interested in learning more about how you can incorporate Palestine into your curriculum, the following resources are extremely helpful: </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><i><a href="http://cis.uchicago.edu/outreach/workshops/08-09/090213-israelpalestine.shtml">Teaching the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict through Dual Narratives</a></i></div><div class="MsoNormal"><i><a href="http://www.youthsolidarity.net/">US-Palestine Youth Solidarity Network</a></i></div><div class="MsoNormal"><i><a href="http://www.ijsn.net/627">International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network – Study to Action: Reader and Curriculum Guide</a></i></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div>Maggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5903137044472734500.post-72341912788422363552011-03-01T21:20:00.000-08:002011-03-02T01:17:36.296-08:00Highlights From San Francisco Protest In Solidarity with LibyaOn Saturday, February 26th, hundreds of East Bay and San Francisco residents rallied in solidarity with Middle East and North African protesters. Organizers scheduled the event at UN Plaza, the same location as previous marches for Egypt and Tunisia. Sponsored by more than 20 different organizations, the protest focused primarily on Libya, though attention was given to uprisings in Bahrain, Yemen, Morocco, Jordan, Syria, Iran, as well as all nations currently fighting for freedom. Many attendees wore keffiyehs. Activists were also joined by marchers from a nearby rally held at City Hall in support of Wisconsin workers fighting to retain their right to unionize.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiLWoCCGkw4ja7poqg1xH7O7NSwr5_hfFme64TwZpo1TGSdH3S_DqDM4xtENjErk_udYUTxue1PAH6hyy8nyaOEjINEua_WPoPLIR7Sx7XW12w1Xyw8IiFGN6-1zQvuUDmyHS42ZS54QYU/s1600/022611133952.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiLWoCCGkw4ja7poqg1xH7O7NSwr5_hfFme64TwZpo1TGSdH3S_DqDM4xtENjErk_udYUTxue1PAH6hyy8nyaOEjINEua_WPoPLIR7Sx7XW12w1Xyw8IiFGN6-1zQvuUDmyHS42ZS54QYU/s320/022611133952.jpg" width="240" /></a>Turn-out was low in comparison to the rally for Egypt, due in part to the absence of the ANSWER coalition (usually a permanent fixture at such events) which <a href="http://www.sfbg.com/politics/2011/02/23/protest-weekend-support-libya-bahrain-yemen-morocco-uprisings">pulled out</a> due to a disagreement "with some of the wording in the protest organizers' press release" and the demonstration lacked the momentum of previous gatherings. One could perhaps attribute the change in tone to the gravity of the events currently unfolding as Gadhafi continues to massacre his own people. Indeed, the protest's largest banner read, "STOP GENOCIDE IN LIBYA" and one speaker began his address with a protracted moment of silence to honor the ever-growing number of martyrs. While most speeches were both hopeful and defiant, a sense of tension pervaded the day, as if we were all holding our collective breath in the hope that the violence will end soon.<br />
<br />
Interestingly, there was a lack of consensus among the organizers and the crowd about what should be done to induce Gadhafi's ouster. One Tunisian speaker called on the United Nations to act, warning, "Don't let this be another Rwanda," while another suggested American military intervention. Others felt that that the brave Libyan people should be allowed to claim their own revolution, asking for help only to facilitating the passage of refugees fleeing for their safety.<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg56IcbdMe__BBcz6bbL6jdME32L0GWsvzz1io1ZUHfTz4xgoFwyGnpts7Nz-ARHddNlc0OChL0GVoZWn53aNgk_K8jJhLmcAKrfP_plifG9Uzb5kyURYFb5agNW2sjB1hgJTgsW84mKHo/s1600/022611134806.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg56IcbdMe__BBcz6bbL6jdME32L0GWsvzz1io1ZUHfTz4xgoFwyGnpts7Nz-ARHddNlc0OChL0GVoZWn53aNgk_K8jJhLmcAKrfP_plifG9Uzb5kyURYFb5agNW2sjB1hgJTgsW84mKHo/s320/022611134806.jpg" width="240" /></a><br />
The crowd was extremely diverse, with many families attending. At one point I stood with a hijabi woman and her three children to my left, a latino socialist passing out copies of <i>The Militant</i> to my right, and a queer Jewish activist (with whom I had just come from a workshop on Palestine education) directly behind me.<br />
<br />
The most popular refrain of the entire event was the message that the fear barrier has been broken. Person after person took the microphone to shout that the Arab world will no longer be intimidated by dictators, the military, fears of instability, Islamists, Americans or anyone else as the protesters roared in agreement.<br />
<br />
<span id="goog_1434063335"></span><span id="goog_1434063336"></span>I noticed many faces from previous demonstrations, including one woman in particular. She was carrying a sign that contained a large crescent along with a star of David, a cross and a capital "A" (meant to represent atheism). "I wanted to be inclusive, to show that this is about all people coming together against tyranny," she told me. As the crowd chanted "the people united will never be divided" I looked over to her once more to see her waving her arms emphatically. I couldn't help but smile.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.blogger.com/video.g?token=AD6v5dxjQ2WSCmjFWi3p6Vho5iTi0mlZy5tUzMBUvLa-lvVkiytvYlDrFOA7bKMCfVF43epwFlqVp72kDigTvT6f0Q' class='b-hbp-video b-uploaded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div><br />
What I find most beautiful about these events is the sense of unity and togetherness they induce. Most people agree that the revolutions sweeping the Middle East and North Africa are powerful. But why so? They are powerful precisely because they have broken down borders and shown the intersection of struggles between peoples. At same time they have "humanized the other" for many Westerners whose only conception of "Arab" is backward and violent.<br />
<br />
To some, standing arm in arm with a crowd full of strangers, shouting at the top of your lungs for the freedom of a group of people whom you have never met in a place you may never go is absolutely foolish. But these events have confirmed, for me and for others I am sure, the belief in a common humanity. Some ask why we protest. They ask why we show up time after time, considering it "changes nothing". I think they're wrong. We're sending messages when we assemble -messages to our representatives and our president, messages to our fellow citizens, but most importantly messages to our Arab brothers and sisters. For me that message is best expressed by a line from the film V for Vendetta. If I could, I would say this to every person struggling for freedom the world over:<br />
<br />
"I hope that whoever you are, you escape this place. I hope that the world turns and that things get better. But what I hope most of all is that you understand what I mean when I tell you that even though I do not know you, and even though I may never meet you, laugh with you, cry with you, or kiss you. I love you. With all my heart, I love you."Maggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5903137044472734500.post-62851594862469869292011-02-16T00:27:00.000-08:002011-02-16T01:29:34.296-08:00Palestinian Queer Activists Talk Politics<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;"><a href="http://www.aswatgroup.org/DatabaseImages/hands10x15.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://www.aswatgroup.org/DatabaseImages/hands10x15.jpg" width="265" /></a></div><div style="text-align: justify;">On February 16th, 2011 I attended a public forum entitled “<a href="https://www.mecaforpeace.org/events/sf-bay-area-palestinian-queer-activists-talk-politics">Palestinian Queer Activists Talk Politics</a>” in San Francisco’s Mission District. More than 20 groups including the National Center for Lesbian Rights, Jewish Voice for Peace and the Middle East Children’s Alliance sponsored the forum, moderated by lesbian Chicana activist and writer Cherríe Moraga. The discussion featured three speakers:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><ul style="text-align: justify;"><li>Abeer Mansour works for Aswat, a feminist queer Palestinian women’s group dedicating to “generat[ing] social change in order to meet the needs of one of the most silenced and oppressed communities in Israel." </li>
<li>Sami Shamali, who resides in the West Bank, represents Al Qaws, which aims to develop a “Palestinian civil society that respects and adheres to human and civil rights and allows individuals to live openly and equally, regardless of their sexuality, sexual orientation and gender identity.” </li>
<li>Haneen Maikey, based in Jerusalem, is Al Qaws’ director. </li>
</ul><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">I found the panel particularly compelling in light of its location, just outside of Dolores Park –a popular go-to spot for queer women in the Bay Area, in one of the most gay-friendly cities in the entire world. Because of San Francisco’s internationally known gay community, it has been a primary target of Israel’s re-branding campaign aimed at improving the country’s image through the use of “Pinkwashing.” Pinkwashing is the attempt to justify Israel’s occupation of Palestine by portraying it as a progressive and democratic haven for LGBT individuals in direct contrast with the rest of the Middle East. It plays into a larger effort that aims to disparage Israel’s neighbors in order to justify the country’s existence as necessary by any means, relying on the image of a lone democracy barely surviving surrounded by violent, intolerant, women-hating, and generally backward societies. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Active within the Bay Area LGBT community, I have personally witnessed attempted pinkwashes. In one particular instance, a protest erupted after the California Supreme Court issued its ruling that Proposition 8 (the initiative defining marriage as between one man and one woman) was constitutional despite its prior decision legalizing same-sex unions. Within hours thousands of people took to the streets in protest. After a procession of speakers demanding equal rights for gay and lesbian couples, the rally closed with a rabbi who took the microphone in order to emphasize Israel’s commitment to gay rights and opposition to Prop 8, and to ask us to support the Jewish State because of it. A few activists including myself were disgusted and immediately left. However the majority stayed, and later that year I found myself hearing these same sentiments <a href="http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2009/01/28/Queers_for_Palestine_/">repeated</a>. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Queer Palestinians, like Afghan and Iraqi women, have consistently found their discourse co-opted by neo-conservative hawks and progressives alike in order to justify war and occupation under the assumption that such actions will ‘liberate’ the oppressed. It is this cynical manipulation that the forum’s speakers work to disparage. Claiming their own voices and movement, queer Palestinian activists are clamoring to be heard and wish for their American brothers and sisters to spread their message. So what is it they have to say?</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">The clearest message resounding from all three speakers was that if one actually cares about LGBT rights within Palestine, one should be working to end the occupation. That Israel has cultivated a vibrant and open gay enclave is laudable, yet such accomplishments do not give the ‘Jewish State’ a free pass to violate human rights, including the rights of the gay Palestinians they allegedly care for. As Haneen dryly explained, “It doesn’t matter what the sexual orientation of the Soldier at a checkpoint is, whether he can serve openly or not. What matters is that he’s there at all.” Sami echoed the same sentiment, jibing that “the apartheid wall was not created to keep Palestinian homophobes out of Gay Israel, and there is no magic door for gay Palestinians to pass through.” </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">When pressed by an audience member as to which situation they would prefer, a perfectly egalitarian, queer-friendly society still under occupation or a free Palestine that still suffers from sexism, patriarchy and homophobia, the three became visibly angry. Abeer looked to the audience and asked, “Please raise your hand if you’d like to live one day under occupation,” before saying that occupied people cannot adequately address civil rights issues as they struggle for their very means of survival. Sami went on to contend that freedom transforms the mind, giving people the best opportunity to examine their previously held attitudes. Drawing on recent events in Egypt, he related that while sexual harassment is rampant within the country, in Tahrir square women remarked an utter absence of abuse during the mass protests. At the same time, if one does not wish to see the correlation between the unacceptably slow pace of social change and the increasing weight of the occupation, one cannot honestly contend that Israel's actions do anything to help the plight of Palestinian women/LGBT individials.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Each had their own story to tell about the intersection of queer identity and Palestinian identity, agreeing that Palestinian homosexuality had its own unique experiences. Yet for all three, the liberation of their country reigned supreme in their minds. The meeting ended with a standing ovation as the moderator boomed, “Clap if you understand that queers will never be free until Palestine is free.”</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">While their discussion did not focus solely on Israel’s abuse of LGBT liberation struggles in perpetuating conflict, I took away from it a deepened understanding of just how much more the West unfairly expects of Palestinians than anyone else. We expect Palestinians to not throw stones at the IDF jeeps who come to teargas their protestations against the illegal confiscation of their entire villages while we wouldn’t bat an eyelash at a man who shot a robber attempting to take his television set; We expect them to not elect representatives that reflect their religious sentiments though no one is surprised when the Christian Right attempts to influence our political system and we ally ourselves with the likes of Saudi Arabia; and we expect Palestinian society to wholly unshackle itself from the bonds of misogyny, racism and bigotry before we acknowledge their entitlement to basic human rights, despite our own shortcomings, including the reality that the realization of LGBT equality within the United States itself is relatively new and still imperfect. In all of the struggles for liberation many Americans support, including civil rights for African Americans, we have never required such a high standard of “goodness” before acknowledging a group’s basic humanity.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Abeer, Haneen and Sami represent a growing coalition of brave Palestinian youth focused on transforming entrenched attitudes from within while simultaneously undermining the imposed constraints of colonialism. Their work is an invaluable contribution to ending the occupation and transforming our understanding of Palestinian society. The message of these activists and their organizations deserves to be heard widely. Please do your part in spreading it to those who claim to care about gay rights. If you would like to attend one of their panels, you can find information for the remaining tour dates <a href="http://www.facebook.com/pages/US-Tour-of-Palestinian-Queer-Activists/127093104016876?ref=ts&v=info">here</a>.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal;"></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"></div>Maggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5903137044472734500.post-24966236859928278272011-01-14T14:09:00.000-08:002011-01-14T14:09:42.149-08:00What the Poll on East Jerusalem Palestinians Really Means<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style> <![endif]--> <div class="MsoNormal">As a November study by Petcher Polls (slideshow <a href="http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://pechterpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Detailed-Survey-Results-on-E-Jerusalem-1-10-11-1034pm-Eastern.pdf&pli=1&chrome=true">here</a>) elucidating the opinions of Palestinian East Jerusalemites makes its rounds on the internet, many hasbarists have used its conclusions to justify Israel’s illegal annexation of the city. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Indeed, the fact that 35% of Palestinians would prefer Israeli citizenship, and that 40% would relocate to Israel should their residence come to be located within a Palestinian state seems quite damning. Yet upon further inspection, the poll does less to justify Israel’s illegitimate actions than superficial conclusions claim, instead working to elucidate the impact of Israel’s occupation on “facts on the ground.”</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://cache3.asset-cache.net/xc/82408846.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=77BFBA49EF8789215ABF3343C02EA548DFA38BFA852A50C6116A0FA159DFEE59DFD70E052C9298E1E30A760B0D811297" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="212" src="http://cache3.asset-cache.net/xc/82408846.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=77BFBA49EF8789215ABF3343C02EA548DFA38BFA852A50C6116A0FA159DFEE59DFD70E052C9298E1E30A760B0D811297" width="320" /></a>According to the poll’s executive summary, “Those who chose Israeli citizenship most often mentioned freedom of movement in Israel, higher income and better job opportunities, and Israeli health insurance.” Palestinians were also particularly concerned with losing access to Al-Aqsa mosque, which Israeli authorities have routinely restricted. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Clearly there is a perceived disparity between Israeli and Palestinian public services, so much so that 35% of Palestinians would prefer Israeli citizenship. However, simple statistics provide an incomplete picture of reality as they do not speak to the cause of this inequality. In reality Israel’s policies of occupation have induced economic crisis within the territories, while the Palestinian governments do all they can to keep their citizens provided for. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">A <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/08/world/middleeast/08palestinians.html">New York Times article</a> focusing on the International Monetary Fund’s study of the Palestinian economy explains, “Following the violent uprising of late 2000 and fierce Israeli countermeasures, an economic crisis began that lasted until 2007 when mild growth began.” Oussama Kanaan, head of the IMF’s mission to the Palestinian territories, attributes growth in the West Bank to “improved security, institution building and transparency from the government of Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, an Israeli easing of restrictions on movement and access and substantial donations from foreign governments.” The article goes on to explain that “all three needed to continue in a predictable way in 2010, Mr. Kanaan said, but so far the Palestinian Authority was the only player clearly living up to its promises.” In this way, as Fayyad continues to build institutions as laid out in his roadmap entitled <i>Palestine: Ending the Occupation, Establishing the State </i>(full text <a href="http://www.mideastweb.org/palestine_state_program.htm">here</a>), the most severe obstacle standing in the way is Israel’s continued and unrelenting stranglehold on the Palestinian economy. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">After the final report was issued in September of 2010, Kanaan again <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704621204575487753108024146.html">reiterated</a> the study’s finding that “growth isn't sustainable without progress in the peace process and the lifting of further Israeli restrictions.” This of course includes Israel’s illegal siege on Gaza, which despite claims to the contrary <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/world-middle-east-11868589">remains in place</a> as it continues to wreak havoc on the Palestinian population. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Israeli economist Shir Hever comes to the same conclusion in <i>The Political Economy of Israel’s Occupation: Repression Beyond Exploitation</i>. One reviewer <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=21761">summarizes</a> Hever’s conclusions, saying, “The Palestinian economy as a whole is prevented from developing, as part of a broader process of exploitation and subjugation.” He goes on to say: </div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><blockquote>‘As local sources of income were suppressed by Israeli authorities, the main source of income to the Palestinians became remittances from Palestinian workers living in Israel, in the Jewish settlements in OPT [Occupied Palestinian Territories], and in the Gulf states.’<br />
<br />
The 1980s saw a change for the worse. Falling oil prices led to falling demand for Palestinian migrant workers in the Gulf States. A collapse in the Israeli stock market led to problems for Palestinian workers in Israel: a fall in income combined with the tightening of work opportunities for Palestinians, accompanied by discrimination and abuse. The growth of Jewish settlements inside the Occupied Territories involved the theft of Palestinian land, damaging the local economy. And Israeli policy became more belligerent, shifting away from seeking consent and accommodation. All these factors influenced the emergence of the first intifada, the militant rebellion by Palestinians against oppression, which started in 1987. <br />
<br />
Fast forward to the Oslo process, which began in 1993. This did nothing for the Palestinian economy; indeed there was a fall in living standards, which was (again) one factor behind the eruption of resistance in the start of the second intifada in 2000. A major problem in these years was the increasing curtailment of employment opportunities for Palestinians seeking work inside Israel. Growing poverty and discrimination fed bitterness and disillusionment. <br />
<br />
A gulf opened up during the Oslo years (1993-2000): while the Israeli economy boomed, the Palestinian economy contracted. For Palestinians, poverty and unemployment grew. Living standards fell still further after 2000, when Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank became increasingly reliant on overseas aid to avoid humanitarian disaster.</blockquote><div class="MsoNormal">East Jerusalemites also fear restrictions on movement in both Israel and Palestine should they gain Palestinian citizenship, and rightfully so. As B’Tselem <a href="http://www.btselem.org/english/Freedom_of_Movement/">explains</a>: </div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><blockquote><div class="MsoNormal">The restrictions on movement that Israel has imposed on the Palestinian population in the Occupied Territories over the past five years are unprecedented in the history of the Israeli occupation in their scope, duration, and in the severity of damage that they cause to the three and a half million Palestinians who reside there. In the past, Israel has imposed either a comprehensive closure on the Occupied Territories or a curfew on a specific town or village to restrict Palestinian freedom of movement, but never has Israel imposed restrictions as sweeping and as prolonged as those currently in place.</div></blockquote><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div class="MsoNormal">The continued construction of Israel’s annexation barrier in contravention of international law only adds to the issue. Placing Palestine population centers on the “Israeli side” of the green line, sometimes encapsulating entire villages ,cutting off farmers’ from their private lands, bisecting various areas of the West Bank, the annexation wall is a serious impediment to the freedom of movement, an essential component for a thriving economy which includes job opportunities and quality public services. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">In these ways, Israel’s behavior directly causes the disparity in living conditions that East Jerusalem Palestinians would like to avoid by becoming full Israeli citizens. Should Israeli policy reverse, the number of residents wishing to obtain Israeli citizenship would likely drop precipitously. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">At<span> </span>the same time, regardless of the poll’s conclusions, the acquisition of territory by war is still <a href="http://www.mideastweb.org/242.htm">inadmissible</a>, Israel’s application of domestic law to occupied territory is still <a href="http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/385ec082b509e76c41256739003e636d/6756482d86146898c125641e004aa3c5">illegitimate</a>, the forcible transfer of East Jerusalem Palestinians is still <a href="http://www.alhaq.org/etemplate.php?id=85">illegal</a>, and evictions and demolitions of Palestinian property (almost always through the pretext of the repugnant Absentee Property Law) are still <a href="http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/b86613e7d92097880525672e007227a7/6de6da8a650b4c3b852560df00663826?OpenDocument">unlawful</a>, as is the city’s forced Judiazation. <span> </span>The fact of the matter is simple: Israel-apologists have attempted to co-opt Petcher’s work to whitewash Israel’s illegal annexation in the name of self-determination, a principle the Israeli government cares nothing for when applied to any group other than Jews. The Israeli government has no regard for Palestinian desires, and will not defer to any kind of referendum on the matter should one ever take place (which it won’t). </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"></div>Maggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5903137044472734500.post-68049413731896115972010-12-31T01:03:00.000-08:002010-12-31T01:07:52.399-08:00Why We Resist Occupation<u>To the States - Walt Whitman</u><br />
<br />
To the States or any one of them, or any city of the States, <i>Resist much, obey little</i>,<br />
Once unquestioning obedience, once fully enslaved,<br />
Once fully enslaved, no nation, state, city of this earth, ever afterward resumes its liberty.<br />
</br><br />
</br>Maggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5903137044472734500.post-51667376092734857152010-12-20T15:09:00.000-08:002010-12-20T19:24:15.760-08:00Israeli Foreign Ministry Plans New Hasbara Effort Against Palestinians<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://nimg.sulekha.com/business/original700/rafael-barak-2010-2-23-12-44-22.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://nimg.sulekha.com/business/original700/rafael-barak-2010-2-23-12-44-22.jpg" width="213" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Rafael Barak</td></tr>
</tbody></table><div class="MsoNormal">Haaretz <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/israel-orders-envoys-take-urgent-action-against-palestinian-efforts-at-un-1.331652">reports</a> that the Israeli Foreign Ministry has officially launched a diplomatic campaign to dissuade the international community from recognizing an independent Palestinian state along 1967 borders and possibly catalyzing the passage of a UN Security Council resolution against settlement building.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Efforts will include “an immediate public relations campaign on the matter at the bureaus of the premiers, foreign ministers and parliament in each respective country” as well as the dissemination of a “legal position paper” expressing that “only direct negotiations could end the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and not unilateral actions that subvert past accords.”</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: right;"></div><div class="MsoNormal">According to Director-General Rafael Barak, “[Seeking a UNSC resolution on settlement activity] can only hurt attempts to renew talks.” Seemingly unbeknownst to Barak are the myriad of pre-existing Security Council resolutions aimed at settlement activity. From a <a href="http://www.resistingoccupation.com/2010/10/netanyahu-throws-bone-to-pa-pa-throws.html">previous post</a>: </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc"><li class="MsoNormal">Operative paragraph one of UNSC Resolution 242, in which the Security Council unanimously “affirms that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of...the following principles: Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict” </li>
<li class="MsoNormal">UNSC Resolution 446 explicitly denouncing settlement activity (three abstentions) </li>
<li class="MsoNormal">UNSC Resolution 452 explicitly denouncing settlement activity (one abstention) </li>
<li class="MsoNormal">UNSC Resolution 465 explicitly denouncing settlement activity (unanimous)</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">UNSC Resolution 471 explicitly denouncing settlement activity (one abstention)</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">Portions of UNSC Resolution 252, passed with two abstentions, in which the Security Council “considers that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, including expropriation of land and properties thereon, which tend to change the legal status of Jerusalem are invalid and cannot change that status; [and] Urgently calls upon Israel to rescind all such measures already taken and to desist forthwith from taking any further action which tends to change the status of Jerusalem”</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">UNSC Resolution 267 explicitly denouncing annexation and settlement of East Jerusalem (unanimous) </li>
<li class="MsoNormal">UNSC Resolution 298 explicitly denouncing annexation and settlement of East Jerusalem (one abstention)</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">UNSC Resolution 476 explicitly denouncing annexation and settlement of East Jerusalem (one abstention) </li>
<li class="MsoNormal">UNSC Resolution 478 explicitly denouncing annexation and settlement of East Jerusalem (one abstention)</li>
</ul><div class="MsoNormal">Frankly, another UNSC resolution condemning settlement activity would merely be a drop in the bucket.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">With these new efforts, Israel makes the claim that Palestinians are illegally sabotaging the entire peace process. This is utter hyperbole. Outside of allegations that the PA has surpassed the legal limitations imposed by Oslo, which can be more thoroughly examined once the Ministry’s position paper is made public, even Barak himself admits that Palestinian actions are “processes that could take place alongside negotiations and a settlement freeze.” </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">The fact of the matter is Palestinian jockeying in the international community cannot unilaterally end the conflict on Palestinian terms. Since the Palestinian National Council’s 1988 declaration of statehood, more than 100 countries have recognized an independent Palestine. To think that recognition of a Palestinian state along 1967 borders by the majority of the international community will substitute for Israeli withdrawal of the occupied territories is a ridiculous position. Israel knows this. So why go to such lengths to subvert recognition?</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Barak plainly states the reason Israel is embarking on its hasbara effort. In his words, “Palestinians were hoping that their proceedings would encourage Barack Obama's administration to take certain steps in their future, including dealing with the 1967 borders and increasing pressure on Israel.” To the Ministry, the realization of such hopes is simply unacceptable. In Barak’s view, all issues must be settled through negotiations which pressure Israel and Palestinians to make equal concessions. This is because Palestinians already have legitimate, established rights to almost all of their demands –rights that Israel is unwilling to accept, and therefore hopes to escape the burden of by “negotiating.” </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc"><li class="MsoNormal">Palestinians are already entitled to their Right of Return as enshrined in UNGA Resolution 194, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">Israel has never been legally allowed to settle any land in the West Bank or East Jerusalem, as evidenced by the numerous UNSC resolutions mentioned above as well as the decision rendered by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the Geneva Conventions</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">Israel’s siege of Gaza was already determined illegal by a UN Fact Finding Mission and must be lifted without condition</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">Portions of Israel’s partition wall that cut into the West Bank (85% of the wall) should already be demolished or re-routed per the ICJ’s decision</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">Palestinians’ (unilateral) right to self-determination is already guaranteed by the UN Charter, the UDHR, the ICCPR and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights</li>
</ul><div class="MsoNormal">There are in reality very few issues which could not be settled by Israel simply adhering to established international consensus. The Israeli government is plainly aware of this fact and is consequently trying to trap Palestinians into making concessions to gain what they should already have. This is why the Foreign Ministry is trying to block another resolution. This is why Israel does not want to face extra pressure from the Obama administration. This is why Israel fears further solidification of diplomatic ties between Palestine and other countries. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">If the international community would simply enforce its decisions, the negotiation process would be a very different one. Palestinians would negotiate only on issues that are not already settled, e.g. the sharing of natural resources and security arrangements, or on the best application of internationally recognized principles rather than arguments about whether they are even valid. In this way, Israel would stand to lose much more than in the current situation. Consequently, the Foreign Ministry will fight with all of its power to maintain the status quo. </div><div class="MsoNormal"></div>Maggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5903137044472734500.post-63417230749118258932010-12-19T05:58:00.000-08:002010-12-19T05:58:05.468-08:00Call to Action: Help Raise Awareness about Cast Lead on December 27th<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style> <![endif]--> <br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.campaignbadges.co.uk/images/gaza%20end%20siege.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://www.campaignbadges.co.uk/images/gaza%20end%20siege.jpg" width="313" /></a></div><div class="MsoNormal">We are coordinating an information campaign to commemorate the second anniversary of Operation Cast Lead, hoping it will call attention to Israel’s continued illegal siege on Gaza. The plan centers on an attempt to trend the hashtag #Gaza2, though we encourage people to use other forms of social media, e.g. Facebook to raise awareness as well. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">We want users to tweet facts, stats, pictures, personal messages, links, blog posts, videos… anything and everything that relates to Cast Lead, the Goldstone Report, Gaza’s humanitarian crisis etc. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">@AmoonaE from @VEPalestine is spearheading the effort. She’s started a twibe for all participants which you can join <a href="http://www.twibes.com/group/Gaza2-Campaigners">here</a>. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Some of you might think this is silly, but it’s a very simple effort, and well worth the time it takes to send a few tweets/status updates should it end up being successful. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">If you have any questions or input, you can post them on the twibe’s page, or contact any one of its existing members, myself included (@maggiesager). </div>Maggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5903137044472734500.post-79247686568533098692010-12-16T08:03:00.000-08:002010-12-16T16:35:25.461-08:00Congress Aids Terrorism with Position on Palestinian State<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;">On November 29th, 2010 Congressman Ted Poe (R- Texas) submitted H.R. 1734 to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. The main text of the bill, which can be found in its entirety <a href="http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111hres1734ih/pdf/BILLS-111hres1734ih.pdf">here</a>, does the following: </div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;"></div><blockquote style="color: black;"><div class="MsoNormal">(1) reaffirms [Congress’] strong opposition to any attempt to establish a Palestinian state outside the negotiating process; </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">(2) strongly and unequivocally opposes any attempt to seek recognition of a Palestinian state by the United Nations or other international forums; </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">(3) calls upon the Administration to continue its opposition to the unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state; </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">(4) calls upon the Administration to affirm that the United States would deny any recognition, legitimacy, or support of any kind to any unilaterally declared ‘‘Palestinian state’’ and would urge other responsible nations to follow suit, and to make clear that any such unilateral declaration would constitute a grievous violation of the principles underlying the Oslo Accords and the Middle East peace process; </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">(5) calls upon the Administration to affirm that the United States will oppose any attempt to seek recognition of a Palestinian state by the United Nations or other international forums and will veto any resolution to that end by the United Nations Security Council;</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">(6) calls upon the President and the Secretary of State to lead a high-level diplomatic effort to encourage the European Union and other responsible nations to strongly and unequivocally oppose the unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state or any attempt to seek recognition of a Palestinian state by the United Nations or other international forums; and</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">(7) supports the resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the achievement of a true and lasting peace through direct negotiations between the parties.</div></blockquote><div style="color: black;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;">Since this submission, another bill proposed by Rep. Howard Berman, Chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and allegedly <a href="http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2010/12/2010121611101496814.html">penned by AIPAC</a> has passed as of December 15<sup>th</sup>. Though the text of this bill has yet to be made public, the American Association for Palestinian Equal Rights and the U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation are basing their critique of the legislation on the text of H.R. 1734.</div><div style="color: black;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;"><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://images.chron.com/blogs/txpotomac/Ted%20Poe%20225.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://images.chron.com/blogs/txpotomac/Ted%20Poe%20225.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Rep. Ted Poe (R-TX)</td></tr>
</tbody></table>This legislation stands in testament to the well-established fact that American politicians not only consistently act unfairly in the interests of Israel to the detriment of Palestinians, but further imperil the lives of American citizens with their actions by directly and unnecessarily contributing to the perpetuation of terrorism against the United States. </div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;">H.R. 1734 speaks to the inherent hypocrisy of the US government’s position on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict in that it takes specific issue with the concept of “unilateral declarations of statehood,” apparently lost to President Truman’s recognition of Israel’s (unilateral declaration of) statehood within 11 minutes of the 1948 proclamation. Upon being recognized by a majority within International Community of States, Israel was accepted into the United Nations, against the objections of Palestinians and various Arab nations. </div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;">Seemingly, there is nothing objectionable in this series of events in the House's view regardless of its impact on the conflict. However, Palestinians cannot be afforded the same opportunity to appeal to the international community when negotiations prove unproductive. Because the legislation makes no mention of the means by which Israel declared statehood, nor of the violence that resulted, one cannot conclude that congress is trying to avoid making the same mistake as before. Instead, the House simply contends that Palestinians must be subjected to Israel’s proclivity for intransigence for an indefinite period of time ,so as not to adversely affect the virtually non-existent peace process, remaining trapped by agreements that Israel routinely <a href="http://www.robat.scl.net/content/NAD/negotiations/neg_violations/index.php">violates</a> while the Palestinian Authority falls over itself to improve Israel’s security situation. </div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;">While congress claims that the PA has not lived up to its Oslo promises, a charge that stems from alleged shortcomings in preventing terrorism and incitement, reality tells a different story. According to <a href="http://alexbkane.wordpress.com/2010/11/29/someone-should-tell-ileana-ros-lehtinen-wikileaks-docs-show-israels-happiness-with-palestinian-authority/">recently released wikileaks cables</a>, Israel is fact quite pleased with the PA. What’s more Palestine solidarity activists, investigative journalists and human rights organizations routinely accuse the PA with <a href="http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Special/2010/11/24/US-trained-Palestinian-forces-accused/UPI-53931290626686/">human rights violations</a> in its attempts to strangle both violent and non-violent resistance, and generally accepting Israel’s attempt to outsource the occupation. </div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;">Even the <a href="http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/4c63b63e2d.html">Department of State agrees</a> that the PA has done exceedingly well in living up to its security obligations, stating, “the Palestinian Authority (PA) continued its counterterrorism efforts in 2009, with an emphasis on controlling the activities of terrorist organizations, particularly Hamas, in the West Bank.” The report goes on to state that the main threat to Israeli security comes from Hamas’ qassam fire, and that during the reporting period “Israeli authorities, among others, identified the improved capacity and performance of PA security forces as a leading contributor to the improved security environment of the West Bank.” Finally, “Security cooperation between the PA and the Israeli government was close and productive, although there were continued Israeli military incursions in Palestinian population centers in the West Bank, which the PA strongly criticized. PA officials stressed the importance of close security cooperation with the Israeli government.” Thus the PA is not only fully engaged in maintaining security within the occupied West Bank and for Israel, but would like to cooperate with Israel <i>even more so than it already does. </i></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;">Yet Palestinians are no closer to achieving statehood, and instead are being called upon by congress to continue to engage “without precondition” (read: while simultaneously letting Israel confiscate Palestinian land in violation of international law). Why on earth should they? Simply because Congress is under the impression that peace can only be achieved through direct negotiations, despite the utter lack of progress toward a lasting solution, and continuous steps in the opposite direction. </div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;">Congressmen Poe and Berman would rather attempt to strong-arm Palestinians and the international community at large into sitting down to Israel’s table. This brings us to the next issue with the bill: the United States government’s insistence on actively interfering with Palestinian diplomacy on behalf of Israel. The United States is perfectly warranted in refusing to recognize a Palestinian state along pre-1967 borders. There are many states within the United Nations that do not recognize one another. However, actively attempting to convince other nations to follow suit, and threatening to veto any legislation that would otherwise pass through the Security Council is not only inherently wrong and prejudiced, but perfectly exemplifies one of the main reasons the United States is a consistent target of terrorism. </div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;">Authors of <i>The Israel Lobby</i> John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt content that there is “abundant evidence that U.S. support for Israel encourages anti-Americanism throughout the Arab and Islamic world and has fueled the rage of anti-American terrorists.” [1] Mearsheimer and Walt go on to explain: </div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;"></div><blockquote style="color: black;"><div class="MsoNormal">While some Islamic radicals are genuinely upset by what they regard as the West’s materialism and venality, its alleged “theft” of Arab oil, its support for corrupt Arab monarchies, its repeated military interventions in the region, etc., they are also angered by U.S. support for Israel and Israel’s harsh treatment of the Palestinians. Thus, Sayyid Qutb, the Egyptian dissident whose writings have been an important inspiration for contemporary Islamic fundamentalists, was hostile to the United States both because he saw it as a corrupt and licentious society and also because of U.S. support for Israel. Or as Sayyid Muhammed Husayn Fadlallah, spiritual leader of Hezbollah, put it in 2002, “I believe that America bears responsibility for all of Israel…America is a hypocritical nation…for it gives solid support and lethal weapons to the Israelis, but it gives the Arabs and the Palestinians only words.”</div></blockquote><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;">Unconditional American support for Israel was also one of the chief reasons Al Qaeda used to target the World Trade Center in 2001. The 9/11 commission determined in a background study, bin Laden attempted to expedite the attack upon witnessing the beginning of the Second Intifada in the fall of 2000 and again when he learned Ehud Barak was to visit Washington in June 2001. What’s more, the <i>9/11 Commision Report</i> states Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the so-called “principle architect” of the attack, had an animus toward the United States that “stemmed not from his experiences there as a student, but rather from his violent disagreement with U.S. foreign policy favoring Israel.” [2]</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;"><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200705/r145993_512250.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="185" src="http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200705/r145993_512250.jpg" width="200" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"></td></tr>
</tbody></table>In the same vein, Osama bin Laden articulated myriad justifications for targeting the US and its citizens in his global jihad in his 2005 <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/nov/24/theobserver">“Letter to America.”</a> First and foremost, bin Laden explains that “it is very simple: Because you attacked us and continue to attack us.” His first example: “You attacked us in Palestine.”<br />
<br />
Pre-dating the letter by nine years, bin Laden’s <a href="http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1996.html">1996 Fatwa</a> was primarily concerned with the fact that “people of Islam had suffered from aggression, iniquity and injustice imposed on them by the Zionist-Crusaders alliance and their collaborators; to the extent that the Muslims blood became the cheapest and their wealth as loot in the hands of the enemies. Their blood was spilled in Palestine and Iraq.” The title of the fatwa was “Declaration of War against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places." </div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;">Clearly, US foreign policy in general and unwavering support for Israel in particular has contributed greatly to the United States’ problem with terrorism. When politicians advance such potentially destructive pieces of legislation, they must keep this fact in mind, or be prepared to face the consequences –hopefully not with calls to escalate the War on Terror, thereby missing the point entirely.</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;">This is not to say that Americans should yield uncritically to the demands of terrorists, letting them control US foreign policy as citizens cower in fear. Yet the United States consistently exacerbates its own problems by arrogantly dabbling in the affairs of other nations, offering fuel for the fire, and American citizens and troops (not to mention citizens of other countries) pay the price, ...all for what? The truth of the matter is that congress is worried that unilateral declaration and recognition of a Palestinian state will not offer Israel the guarantees it was hoping to squeeze out of the PA with the help of its largest benefactor.<br />
<br />
Unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state, and the subsequent recognition of that state by the international community will not solve the conflict. It will simply allow Palestinians to act from a place of authority and empowerment when settling final status issues with Israel. Without some kind of political capital to rely on, the PA will not be able to guarantee a just solution for its people. Far from being concerned with simply settling the conflict –which the United States could easily do by applying serious pressure to Israel and the PA equally, the US wants to settle the conflict on Israel’s terms.</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;"><br />
Some might contend that this characterization is overly cynical, and perhaps congress truly believes negotiations are the answer. Unfortunately, regardless of the veracity of that contention, one can say with confidence that it is the not the way the international community, or the enemies of the United States for that matter, will view such legislation. </div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">[1] The Israel Lobby - John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, 2007, pg 67</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">[2] 9/11 Commission Report -National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States, 2004, pg 147 </span> </div>Maggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5903137044472734500.post-49265946204334319312010-12-14T04:44:00.000-08:002010-12-14T04:54:11.052-08:00Collapse of Negotiations a Gain for Palestine<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://action.afa.net/uploadedImages/Blog/The_Millenial_Perspective/Obama%20facepalm.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="221" src="http://action.afa.net/uploadedImages/Blog/The_Millenial_Perspective/Obama%20facepalm.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">As the United States <a href="http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2010-12/14/c_13647503.htm">sends</a> US Envoy to the Middle East George Mitchell to grasp at straws in hopes of restarting negotiations to create a Palestinian state after the Israeli government refused to curb settlement construction, Obama’s <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11519969">inability</a> to entice Netanyahu’s coalition to comply with international law has frustrated many who wish for peace between Israel and Palestine. However, upon closer inspection it becomes apparent that Obama’s specific failure and the now-seemingly inevitable collapse of negotiations in general constitute a tactical victory for Palestinians.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Firstly, Obama’s initial offering and its subsequent rejection have opened the door to mounting malcontent among the American public, causing some to examine the United States’ special relationship with Israel more critically. The very contents of the aid package began this process. In the midst of a prolonged recession the US offered Israel $3 Billion worth of F-35 fighter jets among other incentives (such as a guarantee of U.S veto should the Palestinian Authority call upon United Nations Security Council to recognize a Palestinian state) at the same time that Bush tax cuts for the wealthy were extended for two years. To many Americans, politicians’ Israel First attitude became glaringly obvious –and quite a few did not like what they saw. Incidents such as this offer a powerful foundation for reexamining Israel’s special place in the United States’ pocketbook. The context of this offer, embedded in a time in which the state of the economy has facilitated the emergence of staunch movements against large government expenditures, could not be worse for Israel, which relies on US aid to sustain the occupation. Undermining this relationship has real consequences for Palestinians on the ground. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">On a political level, the generosity of the offer exposed the United States’ impartiality in the matter. America usually functions more as <a href="http://www.resistingoccupation.com/2010/10/obama-israels-lawyer.html">Israel’s lawyer</a> than a third-party facilitator of negotiations. Illuminating Obama’s position and methodology gives observers a perfect example of such behavior. Recognition of this reality is an integral component of its correction. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Luckily, US taxpayers avoided further subsidizing Israel’s war crimes and in doing so escaped an unnecessary if not immoral burden. Obama’s failure also did more to expose the United States’ weakness in the face of Israeli obstinacy, calling into question exactly who is in control of this relationship. Palestine solidarity activists and impartial analysts have long argued that Israel “wags the dog” when it comes to the US to American detriment. Israel’s refusal to cooperate with US demands is not new, yet this particular incident highlights the country’s arrogance in a startlingly demonstrative way. Each instance of recalcitrance works to undermine Israel’s position in American esteem, or at the very least stretches the bounds of what previously unconcerned Americans are willing to stand.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Some believe that Obama’s offer was simply a pretext for items that Israel will <a href="http://mondoweiss.net/2010/11/wait-we-are-giving-who-20-f-35-stealth-attack-jets-for-what.html">inevitably receive</a> irrespective of compliance with any US demands. Various analysts have suggested this is the very reason Netanyahu was unable to convince his coalition to accept a partial moratorium –why by the cow when you can get the milk for free? Yet the delinking of the package from the peace process again offers US citizens more grounds to question policy toward Israel. Apologists might be compelled to excuse the fiscal magnitude of Obama’s gift with the belief that peace is worth any price. What excuse can they offer if Israel still receives it regardless of intransigence? If receiving these items were inevitable, there are only three outcomes. 1) The US will be further exposed as putting Israel’s interests ahead of its own in even more explicit terms 2) Israel will have to actually pay for the jets or 3) The US will be forced to create another pretext for the gift. In any event, Palestinians win.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">As for US Security Council veto, while many assume Israel needs no such guarantee as the US consistently veto’s “anti-Israel” legislation without precondition, Israel’s refusal to meet demands obviates 100% certainty on the subject.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">The current stall in and ultimate failure of negotiations also renders moot the weakness of any agreement that would have been reached, specifically the inability to enforce it due to Hamas’ absence in the process. As the ruling government of what will be the other half of a Palestinian state, Hamas’ cooperation with Fatah in implementing any promises made to Israel and acceptance of Israel’s pledges as sufficiently just are integral to the contract’s viability. Leaving Hamas out only works to ensure that the entire process will be an exercise in futility, in which case Palestinians will (most likely) have given up much in exchange for nothing at all while Israel exploits Hamas’ non-cooperation to excuse its own inevitable shortcomings. If the peace process does not fall apart completely, at the very least stalling the resumption of negotiations will give Hamas and Fatah a chance to continue the next round of reconciliation talks between the two factions. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">In most cases, Israel has sufficiently controlled popular discourse concerning all aspects of the conflict, whether they center on war history, the humanitarian situation in Gaza, the level of existential threat the country faces, justifications for various human rights abuses or the disintegration of negotiations. The latest collapse serves as a marked departure from such control of the narrative. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">While Arabs were unfairly blamed for everything from their own ethnic cleansing (by not implementing the UN’s 1948 Partition Plan) to not accepting a state of their own when they were offered one (as Arafat rejected Camp David), the world has finally woken up to Israel’s role in perpetuating conflict. Main stream outlets’ coverage of negotiations plainly refers to Israel’s refusal to curb settlement construction as the reason for the stalemate. Couple this development with international backlash against Operation Cast Lead in 2008 and reactions to the flotilla massacre this past May and Palestinians just might be getting the sympathetic ear their cause deserves. People are looking at the conflict through a new paradigm, one which is more reflective of reality and consequently works to empower the Palestinian position.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">At the same time, the more radical elements of Netanyahu’s settler-controlled coalition are finally being exposed. The more racist legislation that passes through the Knesset, the more opportunities for peace that the coalition rejects, the more Israel will be treated like a rouge pariah state. The political isolation that will ensue provides Israel with a compelling reason to fall in line with accepted international norms or will at minimum mount international support in defense of Palestinian rights.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">The international community has already begun to act in solidarity with Palestine as a result of Obama’s failure. The Palestinian Authority’s threat to appeal to the United Nations to facilitate the declaration of an independent state has been historically seen as an empty threat, however as a result of the latest collapse Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay have formally recognized a Palestinian state along 1967 borders in the past weeks. The European Union will discuss recognition in as soon as one year. Israel is losing its chance to impact the substance of a settlement.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">What’s more, the media are now openly discussing other alternatives to solving the conflict, including a one-state solution. As Alex Kane <a href="http://alexbkane.wordpress.com/2010/12/13/obamas-failure-prompts-media-discussion-of-one-state-solution/">reports</a>, while the debate on a one-state solution has been discussed in reference to its allegedly disastrous consequences for Israel, any solution-oriented debate that utilizes the term “apartheid” is a step in the right direction to achieving justice for Palestinians both inside and outside Israel. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Because the proposed settlement moratorium was admittedly partial (excluding East Jerusalem in contravention of international law) and temporary (only to last 90 days), Palestinians did not stand gain much tangibly. In contrast, Israel’s rejection of Obama’s incentive package has provided myriad advantages to the Palestinian cause which would have proved difficult to attain in alternate iterations of events. While peace still seems illusive, it is fair to say that Palestinians have gained more than they have lost this week. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div>Maggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5903137044472734500.post-33368862129710542672010-12-12T06:22:00.000-08:002010-12-18T06:10:01.129-08:00Jennifer Peto: Jews, Zionism and Holocaust Education<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;"><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.thejc.com/files/imagecache/body_landscape/jenny-peto.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="171" src="http://www.thejc.com/files/imagecache/body_landscape/jenny-peto.JPG" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Jenny Peto</td></tr>
</tbody></table><span style="font-size: 11.5pt;">Currently, a controversy has arisen regarding University of Toronto graduate Jennifer Peto’s thesis, </span>“<i>The Victimhood of the Powerful: White Jews, Zionism and the Racism of Hegemonic Holocaust Education.” </i><i><span style="font-style: normal;">According to certain members of the <a href="http://mondoweiss.net/2010/12/debate-over-peto-thesis-reaches-the-halls-of-government-as-israelpalestine-proxy-battle-rages-on-in-canada.html">Canadian government</a> as well as <a href="http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/12/09/wow-%E2%80%94-even-ultra-politically-correct-lefties-are-throwing-jennifer-peto-under-the-bus/">Holocaust educators</a>, Peto (a queer anti-Zionist Jew, the granddaughter of a Holocaust survivor) has produced a “shoddy” piece full of “unsupported” theories which constitute an outrageous form of “anti-Semitism.” </span></i></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;"><i><span style="font-style: normal;">That critics would attempt to silence Peto under the banner of self-hating anti-Semitism is altogether unsurprising. Very few have even bothered to read the work before dismissing it wholesale, else they make superficial criticisms such as the contention that Peto did not defer to mainstream texts on Holocaust education or that regardless of her supporting arguments, questioning Holocaust education in any context is unacceptable.</span></i><br />
<br />
<i><span style="font-style: normal;">Beware of sensationalism. Peto does not suggest that all Holocaust education must be done away with, or that all Jews are racists or anything else of the sort. Outside of the apparently controversial idea that Jews possess the capacity for racism, she focuses her thesis on the contention that as a result of various factors (which she discusses at length) Ashkenazi Jews have surpassed the mantle of victimhood in Western society. In the same vein as Norman Finkelstein's </span></i><span style="font-style: normal;"><i>Beyond Chutzpah</i>, using empirically demonstrative data, Peto argues that rampant, entrenched anti-Semitism is all but gone. She then criticizes specific methods of what she terms "hegemonic" Holocaust education which seek to not only obfuscate this fact, but use invocations of perennial victimhood to excuse various Israeli policies. An example: the March of the Living takes Jewish youths on a week-long tour of Polish concentration camps, and has them "march" down the same path as their murdered ancestors draped in Israeli flags. Peto argues that the march is purposefully constructed this way in order to implicitly suggest that the state of Israel is the only thing standing in the way of another Holocaust, and thus must be shielded from any criticism. She also takes issue with various manifestations of ethno/eurocentricism embedded within particular Holocaust education centers. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;"><br />
Because the controversy has stemmed from a fundamental misunderstanding of Peto's arguments and supporting evidence, <i><span style="font-style: normal;">before judging their merits I encourage you to </span></i><a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/37214827/Israel-Jennifer-Peto">read the entire work</a> for yourself.<br />
<i><span style="font-style: normal;">It is my sincere hope that the landslide of negative attention will do more to expose Peto’s ideas to a wider audience, magnifying the impact of her work than it will to tarnish her reputation, thereby mitigating her extremely powerful words. </span></i></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;">Again, I encourage you to <a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/37214827/Israel-Jennifer-Peto">read Peto's thesis</a> on your own. Nevertheless, I have copied her conclusion below; Judge it for yourself. <br />
<br />
</div><div style="color: black; text-align: center;"><div style="text-align: center;">__________________________________________</div><div style="text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: 11.5pt;">On December 27, 2008 I sat down to finish my thesis. As is my usual habit of procrastination, I decided to check my email before getting started. My inbox was flooded with messages informing me that Israel had begun a full-scale military strike on Gaza that had killed over 300 people in the first few hours of bombings. Any thoughts of writing my thesis immediately disappeared. I am an organizer with the Coalition Against Israeli Apartheid in Toronto and we immediately began planning our response. Within 24 hours, we organized a rally outside the Israeli consulate that had over 1000 people in attendance. By the next week, the demonstration had grown to over 10,000 protesters. The Jewish Defense League, an extremist, right-wing Zionist group organized small counter-demonstrations at each of our rallies. The media coverage of our demonstrations chose to focus on tensions between pro-Palestinian and Jewish groups, often skewing the numbers of protestors on both sides to make the demonstrations appear even in size.</span><span style="font-size: 8pt;"> </span><span style="font-size: 11.5pt;">The Canadian government ignored demands to call for sanctions against Israel. Instead, they expressed unconditional support for Israel and repeatedly spoke of Israel’s right to self-defense. Although the mainstream Zionist community was late to enter into the public debates over the war on Gaza, they eventually mounted a campaign against Palestinian activists and their allies. The Canadian Jewish Congress held a press conference, alleging anti-Semitic hate crimes had taken place at many of the demonstrations across the </span>country. Their evidence of these claims was merely video footage of protestors chanting in Arabic and burning Israeli flags – activities that are in no way anti-Semitic.</div><div style="text-align: left;"></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br />
During the first week of the war, I attended an informal meeting of people looking to engage in direct action to bring attention to the war crimes being committed in Gaza. At that meeting, a group of Jewish activists, myself included, decided to occupy the Israeli consulate in Toronto. Our goal was to disrupt the dominant media message that this is an inter-religious conflict and that all Jews support Israeli aggression and violence. We wanted to draw attention to the fact that many Jews oppose Israel’s actions, in order to help neutralize attempts by Zionists to characterize all criticism of the war as anti-Semitic. Our hope was that this action would allow others – both Jewish and non-Jewish – to feel more empowered to voice their criticism of Israel’s violence against Palestinians without fearing accusations of anti-Semitism. On January 7, 2009, eight of us occupied the Israeli consulate for about two hours before being arrested. We were held in the back of a police wagon for about an hour before being released without charges. All the major news networks were at the consulate and many of us were interviewed, but the story never aired on the evening news. Some articles were published in local newspapers, but for the most part, the media in Canada kept the story quiet. Word of the action spread around the world and we received messages of support from across the globe. In the following days there were similar actions in Montreal, Los Angeles and San Francisco. One success of the action was that after the occupation, there has been noticeably more acknowledgement in the media that there is dissent within the Jewish community and that there are Jewish people who oppose Israeli Apartheid.<span style="font-size: 11.5pt;"> </span></div><div style="text-align: left;"></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br />
<span style="font-size: 11.5pt;">In the weeks that followed the occupation of the consulate, I became one of two main spokespeople for the group that was involved. I was asked to speak at rallies, teach-ins and other events about Gaza and Israeli Apartheid. I received a great deal of attention and recognition for having been part of the action, as well as an outpouring of gratitude from my friends and comrades in the Palestinian community. It was an overwhelming experience and it was difficult to maintain perspective given the pseudo-celebrity status that often comes with direct action. Given the magnitude of suffering in Gaza, alongside the on-going brutality of Israeli Apartheid in the West Bank, Israel and for Palestinian refugees worldwide, it felt inappropriate to be receiving so many accolades for having been arrested and held for just over an hour in a police wagon. The whole experience, especially the attention and praise, only made my privilege that much more evident. I began asking myself a lot of questions about the role of allies in solidarity movements and the place of Jewish anti-Zionist activists in Palestine solidarity work. </span></div><div style="text-align: left;"></div><div style="text-align: left;"></div><div style="text-align: left;"></div><div style="text-align: left;"></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br />
<span style="font-size: 11.5pt;">This questioning continued after Israel stopped bombing Gaza as I worked with other activists to finalize preparation for Israeli Apartheid Week (IAW). In March 2009, the fifth annual IAW was held in over 40 cities worldwide. Here in Canada, we faced a tremendous backlash for organizing this week of lectures. Members of Parliament, including Liberal leader Michael Ignatief and Jason Kenney, Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism, issued statements condemning IAW as a ‘hatefest’.</span><span style="font-size: 8pt;"> </span><span style="font-size: 11.5pt;">Several Zionist organizations, including B’nai Brith and the Canadian Jewish Congress called on universities to ban IAW from their campuses. The poster for the event was banned at Carleton and the University of Ottawa. Here in Toronto, our posters were vandalized and torn down as quickly as we could put them up. The Jewish Defense League protested outside our events and on at least three separate occasions, their members assaulted our organizers and guests. University security and police forces at Ryerson University, York University and the University of Toronto did little to protect organizers and participants from this violence.</span><span style="font-size: 11.5pt;"> </span></div><div style="text-align: left;"></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br />
<span style="font-size: 11.5pt;">It was during IAW and the intense protests leveled against us, that I once again saw the importance of anti-Zionist Jewish participation in Palestine solidarity activism. I remain convinced that it is not our role to speak for or about Palestinians and will openly criticize other anti-Zionist Jewish activists when they cross that line. Our role is a supporting one – where possible and appropriate, we can help to open up spaces to talk about Palestine and Israeli Apartheid. We can work to counter the false accusations of anti-Semitism and hate crimes that are being increasingly aimed at events like IAW and other Palestine solidarity activism. As Jews we can use our privilege to put forward the argument that criticizing Israel is not anti-Semitic, but is actually part of a broader movement towards social justice. We need to fight for and defend the rights of Palestinians and their allies to speak without fear of spurious accusations of hatred and anti-Semitism. It is vital that we constantly recognize our privilege and find ways of being allies without falling into the narcissism that so often comes with white privilege, narcissism that would make us mistakenly believe that this is somehow our movement to lead. All Jewish anti-Zionist activism must start with an understanding that there would be no movement without Palestinian resistance and we must always remember that this is a Palestinian-led struggle, in which we can and should play a supporting role.</span><span style="font-size: 11.5pt;"> </span></div><div style="text-align: left;"></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: 11.5pt;"></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br />
<span style="font-size: 11.5pt;">Jewish anti-Zionism must be rooted in genuine solidarity and the desire to fight for justice, but to be sincere in these efforts we need to admit that we as individuals, and the Ashkenazi Jewish community as a whole, have much to gain from the ending of Zionism. I personally come to this work out of a strong commitment to fighting racism and imperialism, but I also have a stake in reclaiming Holocaust memory and taking back the history of my ancestors from the Zionist hegemony that has co-opted it. I believe that we need to find ways of honouring the Holocaust that are focused on healing the Ashkenazi Jewish community and that challenge Zionism and Jewish racism, as well as the oppression and violence that exists within the Jewish community. To do so, we need to express our rage and sadness about the abuse of Holocaust memory for Zionist and racist purposes. We need to openly challenge hegemonic Holocaust memorial institutions, which have become sacrosanct within Jewish and non-Jewish communities. We must demand a drastic change in the ways in which we engage with the violence of anti-Semitism and the Holocaust. It is time to end memorials that are meant to traumatize and re-traumatize by forcing generations of Jewish people to try to recreate and relive the horrors. We must force the Ashkenazi Jewish community to face the trauma of our past and admit to the ways in which we have chosen to align ourselves with power in an attempt to ensure that we are not victimized again. We must focus on healing from the trauma of the past so that we can move forward because this morbid focus on victimization and the Holocaust prevents us from understanding the wrongs we commit within the community and against others that are less powerful than we are.</span><span style="font-size: 11.5pt;"> </span></div><div style="text-align: left;"></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br />
<span style="font-size: 11.5pt;">I am well aware of the controversy that comes with challenging Zionism and the even more intense controversy that can happen when doing so involves criticizing Holocaust memorials and education. I chose to take up these issues because it is my hope that my academic work can be useful in exposing the ways in which Holocaust education and Jewish claims to victimhood are being used obscure Jewish racism, and to garner support for Israeli Apartheid. If my thesis can contribute, even in some small way, to normalizing criticism of Israel and Jewish racism, and if it can open up conversations about the damaging effects of hegemonic Holocaust education I will be satisfied with this academic endeavour.</span></div></div><div style="color: black;"></div><div style="color: black; text-align: left;"></div><div style="color: black; text-align: left;"></div><div style="color: black; text-align: left;"></div><div style="color: black; text-align: left;"></div><div style="color: black; text-align: left;"></div><div style="color: black; text-align: left;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; text-align: left;"><br />
</div>Maggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5903137044472734500.post-34693899992022401272010-12-12T01:51:00.000-08:002010-12-12T01:54:38.770-08:00Winning Hearts and Minds for Palestine<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.muslimvideo.com/tv/thumb/1_20375.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="202" src="http://www.muslimvideo.com/tv/thumb/1_20375.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div class="MsoNormal">In encounters with latent Zionists (those who view the current situation in Israel and Palestine as a battle between two equally entitled, equally faulted parties for which concessions and compromise on both sides are necessary to end the conflict) many Palestine solidarity activists find themselves dismissed as zealots. In my personal dealings with such people I have been instructed that the “Israel/Palestine conflict has no room for zealots on either side.” Having dwelt on this accusation for a period of weeks, I have finally settled upon what I think is an appropriate response –apart from various sound bites familiar to the solidarity community such as “I can’t help that the truth has an anti-Israel slant” etc. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">While it might be instinctive to ignore these remarks, I firmly believe that doing so would constitute a missed opportunity. As the legal approach to solving the Palestinian question consistently fails and endless (some say pointless) negotiations drag on, building popular resistance offers activists a chance to influence governments that enable occupation and apartheid while simultaneously eroding private financial support for human rights violations. Unlike their entrenched cousins, latent Zionists can still be convinced; we should not dismiss them, but rather confront the misinformation they’ve been exposed to head on. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Latent Zionists use the term zealot pejoratively in the name of a particularly dangerous form of "moderation." This moderation seeks to frame Palestinian solidarity as a similarly destructive parallel to radical Zionism, equating the oppressor with the oppressed. My accuser defined zealotry as charging the other party in the conflict with all responsibility such that a zealot for Israel is one who believes Palestinians are solely responsible for their position whereas a zealot for Palestine believes Israel is wholly at fault. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">By these parameters any findings that consistently point to Israeli responsibility, however factual, must be dismissed wholesale as biased or counterweighted with an Israeli perspective regardless of this perspective’s truthfulness. Current mainstream reporting on the subject exemplifies this view, e.g. including Israel’s charge that flotilla members killed by the Israeli Defense Force were “terrorists,” that all Palestinian activists are incarcerated for “inciting violence” or that protests broken up violently with rubber bullets and copious amounts of tear gas are always the result of “rock throwing.”</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Because the truth of the matter is simply that objective evidence consistently results in the determination of Israel’s ultimate culpability, in order to escape zealot-labeling (consequently losing the chance to win hearts and minds) we must alter this paradigm. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Latent Zionists hold the views that they do about zealotry due to a very specific misunderstanding of Israel’s origins. To correct this misunderstanding and thus escape zealot-labeling, we must take ownership of certain inescapable facts, namely that the State of Israel built itself on a policy of settlement and ethnic cleansing. We cannot equivocate about these facts, but instead strive to internalize them as part of the commonly understood Palestinian narrative. Israel has controlled the history of Palestine unchallenged in Western discourse for far too long. It is high time for the findings of the New Historians (whether they agree ethnic cleansing was coordinated or not) to replace the commonly perpetuated ahistorical myth of Israel’s “War of Iindependence.”</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">In doing so, it then becomes evident that such a definition of zealotry fails at the onset. History itself is zealous! </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">If we are successful, we can then do what Israeli Knesset Member Hanin Zoabi asked of Palestine solidarity activists in her series of lectures to the American public (I attended one of her events, sponsored by the Palestinian American Women’s Association, in October of this year) –we can put the struggle for Palestinian self-determination and equality in its rightful place among other democratic struggles in popular discourse. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Today no one would suggest that those who advocated British withdrawal from occupied India were zealots. Today, no one would argue that those who advocated civic equality in 1960’s America or more aptly in 20<sup>th</sup> century South Africa were zealots. We have the opportunity and obligation to institutionalize the same attitudes about Palestinians both inside and outside Israel. This opens the door to resisting legitimate manifestations of zealotry when they are apparent in much the same way as taking control of charges of anti-Semitism gives us the chance to expose real racism. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Those who wish to erase Palestine and Palestinian identity are zealots. Those who wish to drive Israelis or Jews “into the sea” are zealots. Those who value justice, equality and respect for human rights are not. While I do not believe activists should spend the majority of their time fighting every ridiculous insult thrown our way, it is not in our interests to be dismissed so easily. We must take the time to make ourselves understood, otherwise we can achieve nothing. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div>Maggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5903137044472734500.post-74213137265453346772010-11-23T01:07:00.000-08:002010-11-23T18:05:52.654-08:00Israel First, America's National Security Second<div class="MsoNormal">In one of the United States Congress’ most recent displays of “Israel First” policy, 39 Representatives, all democrats, have requested that President Obama pardon Jonathan Pollard, an American convicted of spying for the State of Israel in 1987. Pollard is currently serving a life sentence for his crimes. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">According to American Muslims for Palestine:</div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><blockquote><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.tabletmag.com/wp-content/plugins/fresh-page/files_flutter/1285015983pollard.big.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="211" src="http://www.tabletmag.com/wp-content/plugins/fresh-page/files_flutter/1285015983pollard.big.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Jonathan Pollard</td></tr>
</tbody></table><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="apple-style-span"><span style="color: #333333;">Pollard, who was a civilian research analyst with high security clearance for the U.S. Navy, had agreed to spy for</span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="color: #333333;"> </span></span><span class="yshortcuts"><span style="color: #333333;">Israel</span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="color: #333333;"> </span></span><span class="apple-style-span"><span style="color: #333333;">for 10 years in exchange for more than $500,000. According to a January 1999 article in the New Yorker by</span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="color: #333333;"> </span></span><span class="yshortcuts"><span style="color: #333333;">Seymour Hersh</span></span><span class="apple-style-span"><span style="color: #333333;">, Pollard “betrayed elements of four major American intelligence systems.” Pollard caused extensive damage to U.S. intelligence and U.S. national security because of the nature of the highly sensitive documents he sold to Israel.</span></span><span style="color: #333333;"><br />
<br />
<span class="apple-style-span">In many cases, Israel bartered top-secret U.S. intelligence documents it received from Pollard with the Soviet Union, in exchange for Soviet Jewish colonial emigration to historic Palestine, Hersh wrote. <sup>[1]</sup></span></span></div></blockquote><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="apple-style-span"><span style="color: #333333;">During sentencing t</span></span>he prosecutor, in compliance with an agreement in which Pollard pled guilty, asked for "only a substantial number of years in prison"; Judge Aubrey Robinson, Jr., not being obligated to follow the recommendation of the prosecutor, and after hearing a "damage-assessment memorandum" from the Secretary of Defense, imposed a life sentence. <sup>[2]</sup></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">In the letter sent to President Obama, the Representatives explain that “<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="color: #333333;">s</span></span><span class="apple-style-span"><span style="color: #333333;">uch an exercise of the clemency power would not in any way imply doubt about [Pollard’s] guilt, nor cast any aspersions on the process by which he was convicted.” </span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="apple-style-span"><span style="color: #333333;">This seems paradoxical. According these representatives, Pollard is indeed guilty of the charges against him. What’s more, they find nothing to disparage about the proceedings which resulted in his sentence. So why must Obama set him free?</span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="apple-style-span"><span style="color: #333333;">Because, you see, pardoning him would correct the disparity “between the amount of time Mr. Pollard has served and the time that has been served -- or not served at all -- by many others who were found guilty of similar activity on behalf of nations that, like Israel, are not adversarial to us.”</span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="apple-style-span"><span style="color: #333333;">It is true that Pollard is the only American serving a life sentence for spying on behalf of a neutral country (only 15% of all convicted spies are attempting to transmit information to a neutral country). However, according to a recent study which examined every espionage conviction in the United States from 1947-2001, at least 13% of all spies convicted were sentenced to life in prison, while another 22% were sentenced to between 20 and 40 years. <sup>[3]</sup> Could it perhaps be that the damage that resulted from his crimes was severe enough to render the judge’s harsh decision? For the answer, we must look at the methodology judges use to determine sentencing. </span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="apple-style-span"><span style="color: #333333;">The study’s authors reveal: “Prison sentences for espionage or attempted espionage varied depending on factors such as <b>the importance of information lost</b>, the <b>length of time</b> of the spying, the venue of the trial, the then<b>-current policies of the federal government</b> on espionage prosecution, the <b>context of the time</b> (e.g. wartime or peace, chilly Cold War or detente) and the then-current relationship of the United States with the country that received the information.” </span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="apple-style-span"><span style="color: #333333;">Thus, the relationship between Israel and the United States was only <b>one </b>component determining Pollard’s sentence. With the information at hand, namely the fact that as stated above, Israel was at the time <b>handing Pollard’s stolen documents off to the Soviet Union</b> at the end of the Cold War, and having just heard the </span></span>damage-assessment memorandum by the Secretary of Defense, Judge Robinson issued his sentence. This sentence was the result of the evidence brought against Pollard as well as his own confession. He was convicted based on the severity of his crime and in the midst of one of the <b>largest resurgences of espionage in American history</b> (see <i>Keeping the Nation’s Secrets </i>by the Stilwell Commission, published in 1985).</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="apple-style-span"><span style="color: #333333;">In this way, seeking “clemency for Mr. Pollard as an act of compassion justified by the way others have been treated by our justice system” is ridiculous. While the United States is not at war with Israel, Pollard’s sentencing <i>in relation to the severity of his crime </i>per the Secretary of Defense’s testimony rendered him the same sentence as at least 16 other spies. </span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="apple-style-span"><span style="color: #333333;">Do these Representatives offer any evidence, other than comparisons to (what must be) lesser crimes by other individuals, to justify commuting Pollard’s sentence? Do they take issue with the denials of appeal made by appellate courts in the case or the merits thereof? Do they contend that Pollard was harshly sentenced because of some prejudice harbored by the presiding judge? No. They simply think that his incarceration, which has only strengthened his ties to Israel (he became a citizen while in prison), will somehow serve as a deterrent. </span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="apple-style-span"><span style="color: #333333;">Where is the logic in such a stance? In the name of security, the US government will eavesdrop on its own citizens. In the name of security, the US government will torture foreigners, holding them without charge or trial and bomb Pakistani civilians with drones. In the name of security, the US government will grope and prod passengers as they board airplanes if they refuse to be seen naked through scanners. And yet, in the same breath, elected representatives who quietly reauthorized provisions of the PATRIOT act in February 2010 would argue for the rights of a confessed, convicted spy passing intelligence secrets, and do so in the name of justice and compassion! </span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.brittanysimon.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/usa_israel_flag_large.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="222" src="http://www.brittanysimon.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/usa_israel_flag_large.jpg" width="320" /></a>Do these Representatives know anything about justice at all? If they do, why do they feel compelled to stand up to perceived injustice in the name of an avowed Israeli spy and yet remain utterly mute when it comes to the prisoners of Guantanamo Bay, at least 55%<b> </b>of whom <b>do not have sufficient evidence against them</b> to determine that they have committed any hostile acts against the United States, at least 40% of whom have <b>no definitive connection with Al Qaeda</b> and least 18%<b> </b>of whom have <b>no definitive connection with Al Qaeda or Taliban</b>? <sup>[4]</sup></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Is it because they only care about Americans? Then why haven’t any of them stepped up to defend Rachel Corrie, murdered by an IDF bulldozer as she non-violently attempted to block it from destroying a Palestinian home? Why haven’t they petitioned Obama to seek justice for Furkan Doğan, a Turkish American who was shot by the IDF at point blank range while lying on his back? Why hasn’t congress properly investigated the death of 37 American Citizens aboard the USS Liberty which was attacked by Israel in 1967? </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Such a request by House democrats is an insult to our justice system, and one that should not be tolerated. The truth of the matter is that Pollard, if granted clemency, will be a benefactor of the United States’ “special relationship” with Israel, a relationship that apparently knows no bounds. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Yet this request is altogether unsurprising in light of Israel’s consistent method of portraying itself in a completely sympathetic light. Israelis are not aggressors, but victims of aggression. They are not bigoted, but victims of anti-semetism. They are not lawbreakers, but victims of the justice system. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Americans suffer every day at the hands of abstract, fleeting “threats to national security” and yet when our national security has been conclusively violated…this is what our congressmen come up with. To buy into such a subversion of moral decency is utterly treacherous. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: x-small;">[1] American Muslims for Palestine, <span class="apple-style-span"><span style="color: #222222;">39 Congressmen advocating for release of convicted Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard</span>, November 2010<b> </b></span>(Accessed 11/23/10)<span class="apple-style-span"><b><span style="color: #222222;"></span></b></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="apple-style-span"><span style="color: #222222;">[2]<b> </b></span><span style="color: black;">Best, Jr., Richard A.; Clyde Mark, <a href="http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/RS20001.pdf"><span style="color: #3366bb;">Jonathan Pollard: Background and Considerations for Presidential Clemency"</span></a></span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="color: black;"> </span></span><span class="apple-style-span"><i><span style="color: black;">Congressional Research Service Report for Congress</span></i><span style="color: black;">., January 2001 </span></span>(Accessed 11/23/10)<span class="apple-style-span"><span style="color: black;"></span></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: x-small;">[3] PERSEREC, <a href="http://www.fas.org/sgp/library/spies.pdf">Espionage Against the United States by American Citizens 1947-2001</a>, July 2002 (Accessed 11/23/10)</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: x-small;">[4] Amnesty International, <a href="http://www.amnestyusa.org/counter-terror-with-justice/86-days/guantanamo-fact-sheet/page.do?id=1051177">Guantanamo Bay Fact Sheet</a> (Accessed 11/23/10)</span></div>Maggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5903137044472734500.post-6420281807432366572010-11-01T03:47:00.000-07:002010-11-01T03:49:21.745-07:00Hasbara Lie Exposed: "Staged" Settler Violence is Actually Tree Pruning<div class="MsoNormal">In a recent <a href="http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3976976,00.html">Ynet News story</a>, a news group operating within West Bank settlements witnessed “Arabs and Leftists” staging an event in which their olive trees were vandalized, so as to further demonize settlers. According to the piece: </div><blockquote><div class="MsoNormal">The photos, taken by members of the Tazpit Unit, were shot on Palestinian land Friday, near the Neveh Tzuf settlement. The images allegedly show Palestinians and left-wing activists cutting down Palestinian olive trees using an electric saw. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div>Many so-called ‘Price Tag' acts targeting Palestinians were recorded in the last few weeks, and the settlers now claim they were staged by the Palestinians themselves and intended to harm the settlers' image. </blockquote><blockquote>Tazpit photographer Ehud Amiton, who documented the vandalism act on Friday, says that this is exactly what can be seen in his images.</blockquote>The article offers the following images to attest to the accusation:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.ynetnews.com/PicServer2/24012010/2835481/5&91;5&93;_hh.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://www.ynetnews.com/PicServer2/24012010/2835481/5&91;5&93;_hh.jpg" width="310" /></a></div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.ynetnews.com/PicServer2/24012010/2835273/2_wh.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="310" src="http://www.ynetnews.com/PicServer2/24012010/2835273/2_wh.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.ynetnews.com/PicServer2/24012010/2835480/3&91;8&93;_wa.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="232" src="http://www.ynetnews.com/PicServer2/24012010/2835480/3&91;8&93;_wa.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><br />
From this evidence we are expected to deduce that these men could possibly be “leftists” (is it that they carry their saws in an apologetic, bleeding-heart liberal sort of way?), and that they attempted to perpetrate this ruse in broad daylight, with no apparent interest in hiding their activity. We are expected to conclude that, while staging the crime, they thought it best to place the branches they cleanly sawed from their olive trees in neat piles, perhaps as a way of implicitly commending settlers for their organizational skills. <br />
<div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">We are also expected to suspend our knowledge of the recent culmination of the olive harvest, and of the proper procedures for the maintenance of post-harvest trees. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Here is another example of staged settler violence: </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjItHSWsd2mY_hyK0sxRh7sAtYDcKHSkNmA8e0V887aoPANoT_-gC0AvGWP-YU1RGQ5ox5KlgwjdumCDpwoiSUdZIm6OaASZL-NCm6eEgOMY0wk-bATELPV-qNm2rCiDL9jpP1uAWmIxszU/s1600/olive+branch+pile.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjItHSWsd2mY_hyK0sxRh7sAtYDcKHSkNmA8e0V887aoPANoT_-gC0AvGWP-YU1RGQ5ox5KlgwjdumCDpwoiSUdZIm6OaASZL-NCm6eEgOMY0wk-bATELPV-qNm2rCiDL9jpP1uAWmIxszU/s320/olive+branch+pile.JPG" width="320" /></a></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Okay, I lied. It is actually a picture of pruned olive branches from an Italian grove immediately after the harvest season. You can find it <a href="http://montisabini.blogspot.com/2010/04/pruning-olive-trees.html">here</a>, in a blog dedicated to olive oil and wine from the Sabine Hills in Italy. The post explains:</div><blockquote><div class="MsoNormal">Pruning olive trees can take place anytime from the Autumn to early spring, depending on factors such as the type of olive, the yield of the previous year and the condition of the tree.<br />
<br />
The pruned branches are then collected into piles between the trees. The leaves are then either burnt, or used to produce cosmetics or complimentary health remedies.</div></blockquote><div class="MsoNormal"> As readers, we are also expected to disregard <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyvMm9LW2-4">this video</a>, posted by the creator of <a href="http://olive-abacus.com/About.html">Olive Abacus</a>, a “permanent online olive information repository” dedicated to “shedding light on all issues related to olives.” </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">In the video’s first seconds our narrator “Olive Branche” illuminates: </div><blockquote><div class="MsoNormal">Each year, immediately after the olive harvest in Andalucía, Spain, the trees are pruned of their older branches making way for the younger, more productive ones. As an olive branch ages, it becomes less productive, requiring pruning. Pruning allows more sunlight into more areas of the tree. It also increases the quality and quantity of fruit the tree produces.</div></blockquote><div class="MsoNormal">The video then cuts to an image of a masked man with a chainsaw, cutting olive branches and placing them to the side. At 2:56 we are shown neat piles of branches (where have we seen this before?), which will then be disposed of. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.blogger.com/video.g?token=AD6v5dxroZXzDSUEypaaNNIkb-7GDHCGGTTALi70_kh2vmoKFdSDG18-qpWHvLNrtLkqDkv2fn6m6ZyFO9N4li9u1w' class='b-hbp-video b-uploaded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">In essence, we are expected to be utterly devoid of critical thought in order to believe such a wild story. We are supposed to ignore the fact that settler violence against Palestinians is <a href="http://www.resistingoccupation.com/2010/10/settler-violence-in-occupied-west-bank.html">well documented</a> by human rights organizations. We are called upon, instead, to believe that Palestinians are actually victimizing themselves, despite the fact that they reap nothing from such action. <a href="http://www.yesh-din.org/site/index.php?page=summary&lang=en">No arrests are made</a> in connection with violence against Palestinian property. Police rarely even go through the motions of investigation, and if they do so, perpetrators are never brought to justice. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">For most families, they are lucky if they even have access to their farm land, considering blockage by ever-encroaching settlements and the <a href="http://www.icrc.org/Web/Eng/siteeng0.nsf/html/palestine-tvnews-170210%21OpenDocument">security apparatus</a> they bring along. When they are allowed onto their own land, these olives can be the only source of income they have. If no one compensates them for their losses, if no one but a few human rights organizations and activists even care to notice this long history of abuse, and if abusers are systematically absolved of responsibility, what, exactly, do those who “staged” this vandalism stand to gain? As readers, we must stifle these questions. We wouldn’t want to be construed as “leftists” now would we? </div>Maggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5903137044472734500.post-29670130041312865632010-10-29T07:03:00.000-07:002010-11-01T04:06:35.087-07:00Israel Gets Away With Murder...Again<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.yorkagainstthewar.org.uk/blog/blog_images/Avigdor_Lieberman_landscape.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="237" src="http://www.yorkagainstthewar.org.uk/blog/blog_images/Avigdor_Lieberman_landscape.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div class="MsoNormal">This morning the <a href="http://www.jpost.com/Headlines/Article.aspx?id=193241">Jerusalem Post</a> reported that the Israeli foreign ministry has successfully thwarted an attempted meeting between the signatories of the Geneva Convention which would have convened in Switzerland. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">According to the article, foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman was motivated to block the meeting because it “could have resulted in a public statement that Israel has violated the charter during Operation Cast Lead in the Gaza Strip during 2009.” The article also credits Lieberman with “preventing the establishment of the victim's compensation fund of those injured in Cast Lead, which was decided by the UN Human Rights Council.” (What a fantastic human being)</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Such a development should come as no surprise, as it speaks to the culture of impunity the international community affords Israel with respect to its military operations (among other things). It is almost as if the more egregious Israel is in its violations of international law, the more the country’s leaders are able to shield it from criticism. With each new operation, this list of violations grows longer. According to the <a href="http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/specialsession/9/docs/UNFFMGC_Report.PDF">Goldstone Report</a>, apart from the Geneva Conventions, Israel has acted in direct contravention of numerous articles of the following international agreements (in no particular order):</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc"><li class="MsoNormal">The Hague Regulations; <sup>(394)</sup></li>
<li class="MsoNormal">The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; <sup>(395)</sup></li>
<li class="MsoNormal">The Convention Against Torture; <sup>(395)</sup></li>
<li class="MsoNormal">The Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials; <sup>(398)</sup></li>
<li class="MsoNormal">The Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials; <sup>(398)</sup></li>
<li class="MsoNormal">The Declaration on Human Rights Defenders; <sup>(421)</sup></li>
<li class="MsoNormal">The Universal Declaration of Human Rights; <sup>(407)</sup></li>
<li class="MsoNormal">The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child; <sup>(421)</sup></li>
<li class="MsoNormal">The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; <sup>(434)</sup></li>
<li class="MsoNormal">And the 1995 Johannesburg Principles on National Security, Freedom of Expression and Access to Information among others<sup>(493) </sup></li>
</ul><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
Even more frightening, apart from simply breaching these agreements, Israel has so gravely violated international standards as to be accused by Goldstone, the United Nations, and countless reputable human rights organizations of the following <b>war crimes</b> with respect to its three most recent military operations:</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: large;"><u>War Crimes Committed During Operation Defensive Shield (Palestinian Territories; 2002)</u></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="text-decoration: none;"><br />
</span></u></div><div class="MsoNormal">According to a <a href="http://www.un.org/peace/jenin/">United Nations report</a>:</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc"><li class="MsoNormal">Willful killing</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">Inhuman treatment</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">Unlawful confinement of protected persons</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">Extensive destruction and appropriation of property not justified by military necessity and carried out wantonly and destructively</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">State and settler terrorism </li>
</ul><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
According to an <a href="http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/MDE15/143/2002/en/c79afe78-d7bc-11dd-b4cd-01eb52042454/mde151432002en.html">Amnesty International report</a>:</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc"><li class="MsoNormal">Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population and infrastructure</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">Violating the principle of proportionality</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">Using methods of indiscriminate attack</li>
</ul><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><u>War Crimes Committed During the July War (Lebanon; 2006)</u></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">According to a <a href="http://www.extrajudicialexecutions.org/application/media/2006%20mission%20report%20A_HRC_2_7.pdf">United Nations report:</a></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc"><li class="MsoNormal">Willful killing of protected persons</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">Violating the principle of proportionality</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">Violating the principle of distinction</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">Violating the prohibition against indiscriminate attacks</li>
</ul><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><u>War Crimes Committed During Operation Cast Lead (Gaza; 2008-2009)</u></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">According to the Goldstone report:</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc"><li class="MsoNormal">Unlawful, wanton destruction which is not justified by military necessity <sup>(259)</sup></li>
<li class="MsoNormal">The use of human shields <sup>(299)</sup></li>
<li class="MsoNormal">Acts amounting to perfidy resulting in death or serious personal injury <sup>(300)</sup></li>
<li class="MsoNormal">The rounding-up of large civilians [which is] a collective penalty on those persons, [amounting] to measures of intimidation and terrorism <sup>(323)</sup></li>
<li class="MsoNormal">Outrages on personal dignity, humiliating and degrading treatment…and inhumane treatment <sup>(323)</sup></li>
<li class="MsoNormal">Forcing women to endure especially distressing circumstances during their unlawful detention <sup>(323)</sup></li>
<li class="MsoNormal">Illegal treatment of unlawful detainees including shackling, severe beatings during detention and interrogation, being held in foul conditions and solitary confinement -actions which violate prohibitions against physical or moral coercion of protected persons <sup>(324)</sup></li>
<li class="MsoNormal">Torture <sup>(324)</sup></li>
</ul><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
Goldstone also found evidence for <b>crimes against humanity</b> as a result of a “series of acts that deprive Palestinians in the Gaza Strip from their means of subsistence, employment, housing and water, freedom of movement and their right to leave and enter their own country,” <sup>(371) </sup>as well as the “systematic discrimination, both in law and in practice, against Palestinians, in legislation…and in practice during detention, trial and sentence compared with Israeli citizens.” <sup>(422)</sup></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">A well-documented pattern of eviscerating civilian infrastructure, killing a disproportionately large number of protected persons including women and children, barring medical aid, human rights monitors and journalists from entry to military zones, and utilizing extremely destructive weapons such as cluster bombs and white phosphorus in densely populated areas is also evident in all three operations. (None of these remarks should be construed to obfuscate the reality of acts committed by Hezbollah, various resistance movements or Hamas respectively in each operation. However it must be noted that in scope, such abuses pale in comparison, nor do they make Israel any <i>less</i> guilty). </div><div class="MsoNormal"> </div><div class="MsoNormal">In light of the magnitude and breadth of these violations, the foreign ministry’s ability to disrupt even a <i>possible</i> condemnation is a slap in the face to international standards of justice. Yet once again, through political maneuvering, Israel has managed to shield itself from criticism. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">In the face of such repugnant arrogance, is it any wonder that the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement “singles out” Israel? No other country with such a despicable human rights record has managed to maintain such flourishing relationships with world super-powers. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Imagine, with all the attention Israel’s continued settlement expansion has received in the past few months (in direct and flagrant contravention of the united international consensus on the program’s inadmissibility) Lieberman still has the ability to disband a potential meeting of the signatories for the very agreement that makes Israel’s actions illegal. It is absolutely ludicrous. </div>Maggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5903137044472734500.post-51731785798192438612010-10-24T13:59:00.000-07:002010-10-24T14:05:15.934-07:00West Bank Olive Groves Become Battleground<a href="http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/About/General/2010/10/24/1287940465436/West-Bank-olive-trees-006.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="192" src="http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/About/General/2010/10/24/1287940465436/West-Bank-olive-trees-006.jpg" width="320" /></a>(<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/24/west-bank-olive-harvest-attacks">The Guardian</a>) Eighty-year-old Rasmia Awase had left the best olive trees until last. She and her family had already harvested most of their crop when they went to a small plot near their home in Luban a-Sharqiya on Saturday morning.<br />
<br />
Here were 40 trees that Awase had planted and tended herself, and they were now, two decades later, at their peak – the most productive of all the trees, which support 37 members of the extended family. But Awase found that someone had got there before them and had chopped down the trees, leaving stumps in the ground and branches scattered about the plot. The family blame hardline Jewish settlers from the nearby Eli settlement.<br />
<br />
"I was in shock, I lost my mind," she said. "I planted these trees with my bare hands, I gave them 20 years of hard work – and they are all gone." Each day of her long life was worse than the one before, she said with her eyes watering.<br />
<br />
The Awase family are not alone in their experience. Among the tactics used by Jewish settlers this harvesting season are cutting down and torching trees, stealing fruit and attacking farmers trying to pick their crops, according to human rights organisations.<br />
<br />
"It has reached a crescendo," said a spokeswoman for <a href="http://www.yesh-din.org/site/index.php?page=about.us&lang=en" title="">Yesh Din</a>, one Israeli group monitoring incidents in the West Bank. "What might look like ad hoc violence is actually a tool the settlers are using to push back Palestinian farmers from their own land."<br />
<br />
The upsurge in violence this year is attributed to a rise in settler militancy following the 10-month moratorium on settlement construction in the West Bank and uncertainty about the outcome of the current, although stalled, peace negotiations.<br />
<br />
According to Oxfam, which is trying to help Palestinian olive farmers realise the economic potential of their crops, some families are too frightened to pick the fruit. "We have seen a lot of olive groves burning and trees which have been chopped down," said the charity's Catherine Weibel. "People are clearly very stressed and worried, always afraid the settlers are coming."<br />
<br />
Olives have been cultivated in the rocky hills of what is now the West Bank for thousands of years. Around 95% of the harvest is used to make olive oil, worth up to 364m shekels (£64m) a year to the Palestinian economy. Most farmers are small scale, growing trees on land that has been in the families for generations.<br />
<br />
In recent weeks, there have been numerous reports of trees being stripped of their fruit overnight. <a href="http://www.rhr.org.il/index.php?language=en" title="">Rabbis for Human Rights</a> claimed that the olives from about 600 trees near the settlement of Havat Gilad were stolen before their Palestinian owners could harvest them. Police confirmed they were investigating the alleged theft.<br />
<br />
The police had received 27 official complaints about sabotage since the beginning of this year's harvest, said a spokesman, Micky Rosenfeld. Sixteen Israelis had been questioned. "There are a number of ongoing investigations into damage caused in the past few weeks," he said. "We are working to prevent incidents on the ground. This is an ongoing problem that we have to deal with."<br />
<br />
Damage had also been caused to Israeli property, added Rosenfeld.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div>Akram Awase, Rasmia's son, was sceptical about the protection offered by the Israeli police and military. "In the old days the resistance used to stop them [settlers]," he said. "Now there is no resistance, all of them are in jail. You can't do anything. Who do you complain to? The soldiers protect the settlers. They have raped our land and they will never leave it."<br />
<br />
Related Posts:<br />
<a href="http://www.resistingoccupation.com/2010/10/settler-violence-in-occupied-west-bank.html">Settler Violence in the Occupied West Bank</a><span style="font-size: small;"> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.resistingoccupation.com/2010/10/void-of-responsibility-israel-military.html"><br />
</a></span>Maggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5903137044472734500.post-14857182586243947152010-10-22T03:56:00.000-07:002010-10-22T04:03:38.780-07:00Territories Occupied? What San Remo Really Says<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00180/pg-18-israel-epa_180945s.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="218" src="http://www.independent.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00180/pg-18-israel-epa_180945s.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div class="MsoNormal">In light of the newly intensified focus on settlement construction in the West Bank, many Zionists pressed to find justification for this internationally condemned activity have resorted to the oft-heard argument that the occupied territories are not in fact occupied at all. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">A common iteration of the argument goes something like this: San Remo gave all of Palestine to the Jews. The British Mandate violated San Remo illegally. Nothing can invalidate San Remo. Thus Jews are exclusively entitled to the occupied territories and settlement activity is legitimate. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">In combating this…interesting…justification for the legality of settlements, as well as corollary arguments for “better title” and legal acquisition of territory gained by “defensive occupation” I will attempt to explain exactly what the relevant agreements, treaties, and international laws <i>actually</i> reveal in a series entitled <u>Territories <i>Occupied</i>?</u> The first part of this series will focus on San Remo:</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">A discussion of occupation as relating to the agreement reached by four Allied powers at the San Remo Conference of 1920 must first be placed in historical context in order to determine if it, or any other relevant agreement of the time, did in fact give the Jews exclusive rights to Palestine. Because San Remo relies on the express language of the Balfour Declaration of 1917, this is where we will start. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: large;"><u>What the Balfour Declaration Does and Does Not Say</u></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="text-decoration: none;"><br />
</span></u></div><div class="MsoNormal">The Balfour declaration, considered the authoritative statement of British policy toward Zionism, and related from British Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour to Walter Rothschild states in part:</div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><blockquote><div class="MsoNormal">His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country. [1]</div></blockquote><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEin-A2Nu59KSPezvvB62Oa22k5vcMsTdcljA7R_tgHzkIrEKlTiBGbBJ8dD-gjTtH__gT3NMKGTESCr091XtMUcF-XruV1kL770KEHV6PcBqVSQCXO_KcBZKwbR4g_c0ChhOaR770sB0vc/s1600/balfour+declaration1+copy.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="239" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEin-A2Nu59KSPezvvB62Oa22k5vcMsTdcljA7R_tgHzkIrEKlTiBGbBJ8dD-gjTtH__gT3NMKGTESCr091XtMUcF-XruV1kL770KEHV6PcBqVSQCXO_KcBZKwbR4g_c0ChhOaR770sB0vc/s320/balfour+declaration1+copy.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div class="MsoNormal">The caveat of preserving the “civil and religious rights” of native Palestinians would in the eyes of most disinterested observers deal a fatal blow to the Zionist claim of exclusive rights to Palestine. However, most observers are not in fact disinterested. Many modern Zionists have interpreted this line to mean that while Jews must allow the presence of Arabs within what is now Israel without instituting a policy of apartheid or discrimination (a principle Israel arguably violates), the <i>political</i> rights of the indigenous population were not recognized. Yet this claim falls apart upon further inspection. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">The original draft of the declaration stated “that Palestine should be reconstituted as the National Home of the Jewish people,” however this language was replaced before the declaration could be adopted. [2] There exists stark contrast between the implications of the latter statement and the former. One implies that the whole of Palestine be designated the Jewish homeland, whereas the other clearly leaves room for indigenous national aspirations. The fact that one was preferred over the other speaks volumes as to the intent of the declaration. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">What’s more, in 1919 the General Secretary of the World Zionist Organization made this assertion: </div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><blockquote><div class="MsoNormal">It has been said and is still being obstinately repeated by anti-Zionists again and again, that Zionism aims at the creation of an independent "Jewish State." But this is wholly fallacious. [3]</div></blockquote><div class="MsoNormal">But regardless of what Zionism claimed to be or entail, Winston Churchill elucidated in unequivocal terms exactly what was at the heart of the British government’s policy in the <a href="http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/brwh1922.asp">White Paper of 1922</a>. According to Churchill:</div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><blockquote><div class="MsoNormal">Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab delegation, <b>the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine</b>. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.' … It is also necessary to point out that the Zionist Commission in Palestine, now termed the Palestine Zionist Executive, has not desired to possess, <b>and does not possess, any share in the general administration of the country</b>… Further, it is contemplated that <b>the status of all citizens of Palestine in the eyes of the law shall be Palestinian</b>, and it has never been intended that they, or any section of them, should possess any other juridical status. [emphasis added]</div></blockquote><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div class="MsoNormal">This seems quite clear-cut. To go even further, in elucidating the government’s intentions to the Sharif of Mecca, British Dispatch Commander David Hogarth related, “Political and economic freedom of the Palestinian population was not in question,” nor was the possibility of an independent Jewish state in Palestine. [4]</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: large;"><u>The Hussein-McMahon Correspondence: A Different Story?</u></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">There is, however, one glaring issue with Churchill’s white paper, namely his misinterpretation of the Hussein-McMahon Correspondence of 1915-1916, which deserves attention. The declaration states: </div><blockquote><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/52/Ottoman_Syria_1918.png/720px-Ottoman_Syria_1918.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="266" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/52/Ottoman_Syria_1918.png/720px-Ottoman_Syria_1918.png" width="320" /></a></div><div class="MsoNormal">It is not the case, as has been represented by the Arab Delegation, that during the war His Majesty's Government gave an undertaking that an independent national government should be at once established in Palestine. This representation mainly rests upon a letter dated the 24th October, 1915, from Sir Henry McMahon, then His Majesty's High Commissioner in Egypt, to the Sharif of Mecca, now King Hussein of the Kingdom of the Hejaz. That letter is quoted as conveying the promise to the Sherif of Mecca to recognise and support the independence of the Arabs within the territories proposed by him. But this promise was given subject to a reservation made in the same letter, which excluded from its scope, among other territories, the portions of Syria lying to the west of the District of Damascus. This reservation has always been regarded by His Majesty's Government as covering the vilayet of Beirut and the independent Sanjak of Jerusalem. The whole of Palestine west of the Jordan was thus excluded from Sir. Henry McMahon's pledge. </div></blockquote><div class="MsoNormal">Current consensus does not agree with Churchill’s analysis of the territories excluded. There are myriad issues, as explained<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMahon%E2%80%93Hussein_Correspondence#The_territorial_reservations"><span style="text-decoration: none;"> </span>below</a>: </div><blockquote><ul type="disc"><li class="MsoNormal">(i) the fact that the word " district" is applied not only to Damascus, &etc, where the reading of vilayet is at least arguable, but also immediately previously to Mersina and Alexandretta. No vilayets of these names exist. It would be difficult to argue that the word " districts " can have two completely different meanings in the space of a few lines.</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">(ii) the fact that Horns and Hama were not the capitals of vilayets, but were both within the Vilayet of Syria.</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">(iii) the fact that the real title of the " Vilayet of Damascus " was " Vilayet of Syria."</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">(iv) the fact that there is no land lying west of the Vilayet of Aleppo.</li>
</ul></blockquote><div class="MsoNormal">In a crushing blow to Churchill, the Eastern Committee of the Cabinet held a meeting in which declassified documents relate this statement: </div><blockquote><div class="MsoNormal">The Palestine position is this. If we deal with our commitments, there is first the general pledge to Hussein in October 1915, under which Palestine was included in the areas as to which Great Britain pledged itself that they should <b>be Arab and independent</b> in the future…[5]</div></blockquote><div class="MsoNormal">An interesting picture thus emerges, despite the fact that McMahon’s promises were invalidated by the Sykes-Picot agreement of 1916 (in which the Allies carved up the Ottoman empire into spheres of influence, an idea that would serve as the basis for San Remo) as well as Balfour’s declaration, one in which all of Palestine was offered to the Sharif of Mecca and not the Jews.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: large;"><u>Faisal-Weizmann: More Bad News for Jewish Exclusivity</u></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ee/Sykes-Picot-1916.gif/463px-Sykes-Picot-1916.gif" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ee/Sykes-Picot-1916.gif/463px-Sykes-Picot-1916.gif" width="246" /></a></div><div class="MsoNormal">Sykes-Picot also eviscerated, though not single-handedly, the nascent Faisal-Weizmann agreement of 1919, reached by Hussein’s son Emir Faisal and Chaim Weizmann, who would later become president of the World Zionist Organization. Endorsing the Balfour declaration, and thus implicitly recognizing the political rights of the indigenous population of what would become Israel, the agreement contained the following: </div><blockquote><ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc"><li class="MsoNormal">Article 1: Understanding between Arabs and Jews </li>
<li class="MsoNormal">Article 2: Borders between an Arab and <b>Palestinian state</b> to be determined by a commission</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">Article 3: Endorsement of the Balfour declaration and the establishment of the Constitution and Administration of Palestine</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">Article 4: Settlement of Jews to the land of <b>Palestine </b>provided that<b> “</b>in taking such measures the <b>Arab peasant and tenant farmers shall be protected in their rights</b> [in this case meaning Palestinian Arabs, considering other Arabs would not be living in Palestine] and shall be assisted in forwarding their economic development.” </li>
<li class="MsoNormal">Article 5: Protections of religious exercises and the guarantee that “<b>no religious test shall ever be required for the exercise of civil or political rights</b>”</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">Article 6: Muslim holy places put under Muslim control </li>
<li class="MsoNormal">3 other articles not relevant to the discussion at hand. </li>
</ul></blockquote><div class="MsoNormal">It is interesting to see that a man arguing on behalf of the WZO and happily satisfied with this arrangement would agree that the indigenous population would be protected so ardently, with religious, economic and political rights specifically fortified, even when Arabs would be getting their own sovereign state. It’s almost a shame this agreement didn’t stand the test of time. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: large;"><u>San Remo: What Does it Really Mean?</u></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="text-decoration: none;"><br />
</span></u></div><div class="MsoNormal">The agreement reached at the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Remo_conference#Text_of_the_Resolution">San Remo conference</a> embodied a lot of the basic principles of Sykes-Picot, e.g. a mandate system. <a href="http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/leagcov.asp#art22">Article 22</a> of the League of Nations provides the legal basis for such a division in which mandate holders, to be determined at a later date, would hold trusteeship over territories to facilitate their emerging national identities. San Remo also incorporated the Balfour declaration, in identical language calling for:</div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><blockquote><div class="MsoNormal">…the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.</div></blockquote><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div class="MsoNormal">It was also stated in similar terms that the agreement was reached: </div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><blockquote><div class="MsoNormal">… on the understanding that there was inserted in the process-verbal an undertaking by the Mandatory Power that this would not involve the surrender of the rights hitherto enjoyed by the non-Jewish communities in Palestine…</div></blockquote><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div class="MsoNormal">If we are to accept the above statements concerning the intentions of the British government with the Balfour Declaration, we must accept that these same principles are at the heart of San Remo. Further, every other (now defunct) agreement of the time continued to provide for the political rights and incorporation of the indigenous population of Palestine and did <b>not </b>call for the creation of an independent Jewish state. In this vein, where do modern Zionists come up with the idea that they were ever granted exclusive political rights in all of Palestine? How does that make any sense at all? </div><div class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="text-decoration: none;"><br />
</span></u></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: x-small;">[1]<span class="citationbook"> Yapp, M.E. (1987). <i>The Making of the Modern Near East 1792-1923</i>. Harlow, England: Longman. p. 290</span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: x-small;">[2] S<span class="citationbook">tein, Leonard (1961). <i>The Balfour Declaration</i>. New York: Simon and Schuster. pp. 470.</span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: x-small;">[3] History of Zionism (1600-1918), Volume I, Nahum Sokolow, 1919 Longmans, Green, and Company, London, pages xxiv-xxv</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: x-small;">[4] Khouri, Fred John (1985). The Arab-Israeli Dilemma. Syracuse University Press. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/9780815623403">ISBN 9780815623403</a>, pp. 8-10.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: x-small;">[5] Palestine Papers 1917-1922, Doreen Ingrams, page 48 and UK Archives PRO. CAB 27/24</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">(Resource citations taken from Wikipedia) </span><br />
</div>Maggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5903137044472734500.post-24031030152341671202010-10-12T23:25:00.000-07:002010-10-14T00:20:31.264-07:00Obama: Israel's Lawyer<span id="ctl00_ContentPlaceHolder1_article_control_lblArticleBody"></span><br />
<span id="ctl00_ContentPlaceHolder1_article_control_lblArticleBody">Just yesterday, Prime Minister Netanyahu demanded that the Palestinian Authority recognize Israel as a Jewish state <a href="http://mondoweiss.net/2010/10/the-settlements-are-illegal-regardless-of-whether-israel-is-recognized-as-a-jewish-state.html">in exchange for Israeli compliance with international law</a>. Shortly after, State Department spokesman Philip Crowley illuminated the United State's <a href="http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=191158">official position</a> on the proposal, explaining, "</span><span id="ctl00_ContentPlaceHolder1_article_control_lblArticleBody">We recognize the special nature of the Israeli State. It is a state for the Jewish people." </span><span id="ctl00_ContentPlaceHolder1_article_control_lblArticleBody"></span><span id="ctl00_ContentPlaceHolder1_article_control_lblArticleBody">While President Obama's <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/u-s-after-netanyahu-proposal-our-position-on-settlements-hasn-t-changed-1.318492">views on the institutionalization of Israel's ethnic character</a> are of no surprise, such an outright endorsement of Netanyahu's insult to the PA stands in stark contrast with the vision of the United States as impartial mediator the American public has been spoon-fed over the past few months.</span><br />
<br />
<span id="ctl00_ContentPlaceHolder1_article_control_lblArticleBody"> If the admission of offering <a href="http://www.resistingoccupation.com/2010/10/israel-attempts-to-extort-us-government.html">military, financial and political concessions</a> in exchange for a partial extension of the so-called settlement "freeze" hadn't done enough to destroy the Obama Administration's credibility in the peace process, this was surely the final blow. How could any casual observer continue to believe Obama had the interests of both parties at heart while simultaneously lauding Netanyahu's inanity as even remotely legitimate?</span><br />
<br />
Israel's settlement construction is illegal under international law. The United Nations General Assembly, United Nations Security Council and International Court of Justice all concur: Settlement construction in the West Bank and East Jerusalem must immediately halt <b>and</b> <b>reverse</b>, along with construction of the partition wall. Just as chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said, Israel's Jewish character has no bearing the illegal status of Israel's settlements. Netanyahu's condition is a wanton distraction.<br />
<br />
The proposal also has nothing to do with Israel's right to exist as a nation. Far from being existentially threatened, Israel has enjoyed full recognition of its sovereignty by Fatah and the PA for the past 17 years. The issue lies in Israel's insistence that its statehood be defined on ethno-religious terms. Yet somehow the implications of this definition are utterly lost on Obama. Electronic Intifada founder Ali Abunimah illustrates the point well in two of his recent tweets:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirQKnAa2paB_zbsLTVWL98RPPVavumhfR0IjwTIUt9NrEM8pZWqXayjyIRqh8G21QelcKTO4UWquPcSxzYm9mD0Gtx673FlrgbFHcJOFAFG2iWnBbSVWJwNOQMVEy0jT2fhkexGJLOnfw/s1600/avinunu2.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="130" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirQKnAa2paB_zbsLTVWL98RPPVavumhfR0IjwTIUt9NrEM8pZWqXayjyIRqh8G21QelcKTO4UWquPcSxzYm9mD0Gtx673FlrgbFHcJOFAFG2iWnBbSVWJwNOQMVEy0jT2fhkexGJLOnfw/s320/avinunu2.png" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg27UbCC5cT1us301Vm2K83OnHkOCQlXPxFAADRbngB5wjgOE2LvO7OXQZ-8t-jCTtUzGIWQR3LPT7bEEWUD6W5rysBbiaCgi4xPCnGfDbba5gg-c9lJhivIhODyjpfkSKxbcb59XCBU_w/s1600/avinunu1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="135" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg27UbCC5cT1us301Vm2K83OnHkOCQlXPxFAADRbngB5wjgOE2LvO7OXQZ-8t-jCTtUzGIWQR3LPT7bEEWUD6W5rysBbiaCgi4xPCnGfDbba5gg-c9lJhivIhODyjpfkSKxbcb59XCBU_w/s320/avinunu1.png" width="320" /> </a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div>Would Obama align himself with the moral argument underpinning either of these assertions? One would hope not. Then why is it somehow permissible to endorse the same position when it comes to Israel? And how can his administration support linking the PA's acceptance of such assertions to Israel's admittedly <b>partial and temporary</b> compliance with standards of international law? <br />
<br />
What's more, who could defend Obama as a worthy proponent of peace while he cheers Netanyahu on in his quest to force Abbas into selling out Israel's Arabs, further codifying their second-class status, while at the same time attempting to settle the question of Palestinian refugees' Right of Return prima facie?<br />
<br />
To summarize, if the PA were to accept such a deal, Israel would have achieved the following:<br />
<br />
<ul><li>Further military, financial and political support from the United States;</li>
<li>Formal permission from the PA to continue subjugating Israeli Arabs;</li>
<li>And nullification of the Right of Return for Palestinian Refugees of the Nakba</li>
</ul><ul></ul>The PA would achieve the following:<br />
<br />
<ul><li>A temporary "freeze"of settlement construction on what is to become a Palestinian state <i>if</i> talks succeed, one that would presumably <b>not</b> include freezing construction in East Jerusalem (in contravention of international law), nor the construction of current projects including the thousands that began just a few weeks ago, nor suspending the confiscation of Palestinian property to make room for further construction, just as the last "freeze"did not include these things </li>
</ul> <br />
The United State's endorsement of such an insulting proposal makes clear Obama's complete disregard for Palestinian interests, and his commitment to repeating the mistakes of his predecessors. The authors of <i>The Israel Lobby</i> explain, "As Aaron David Miller, an adviser to six different secretaries of state on Middle East and Arab-Israeli affairs and another key player in the Clinton administration's peace effort, put it during a 2005 postmortem on the failed negotiations: 'Far too often, we functioned...as Israel's lawyer'" (Mearsheimer and Walt 48). How exactly has Obama done anything to improve upon this characterization?Maggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5903137044472734500.post-90399334144563502672010-10-12T00:49:00.000-07:002010-10-12T10:50:53.723-07:00Netanyahu's Seemingly Limitless Arrogance<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://ivarfjeld.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/obama-netanyahu1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="212" src="http://ivarfjeld.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/obama-netanyahu1.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>In the newest development concerning peace negotiations between Israel and the PA, Netanyahu has offered to <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/u-s-after-netanyahu-settlement-freeze-proposal-our-position-on-this-is-well-known-1.318492">partially extend</a> the <a href="http://www.imemc.org/article/59485">fake settlement freeze </a>in exchange for recognition of Israel's Jewish character. In a startling spectacle of rationality, the PA has <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11519969">rejected the offer in kind</a>. BBC reports: <br />
<blockquote>The chief Palestinian negotiator, Saeb Erekat, said Mr. Netanyahu was "playing games" with his offer, and that there was no connection between settlements and the national character of Israel.</blockquote><blockquote><div class="story-feature wide "></div><div id="story_continues_2">"I don't see a relevance between his obligations under international law and him trying to define the nature of Israel," he added. "I hope he will stop playing these games and will start the peace process by stopping settlements."</div></blockquote>He's right. Settlement activity in the West Bank is illegal under international law regardless of Israel's "Jewishness". Perhaps Bibi Netanyahu forgot this:<br />
<blockquote><div class="decktext"><div class="spip">Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, are illegal and an obstacle to peace and to economic and social development [... and] have been established in breach of international law. -International Court of Justice Ruling, July 9, 2004</div></div></blockquote>Or operative paragraph one of UNSC Resolution 242, in which the Security Council unanimously:<br />
<blockquote>...Affirms that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of...the following principles:</blockquote><blockquote>(i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict... </blockquote><blockquote></blockquote>Or UNSC Resolution 446, which affirmed <b>in explicit terms</b> the conclusions of UNSC Resolution 242 (three abstentions) as did UNSC Resolution 452 (one abstention) UNSC Resolution 465 (unanimous), and UNSC Resolution 471 (one abstention)?<br />
<br />
Or the portion of UNSC Resolution 252, passed with two abstentions, in which the Security Council:<br />
<blockquote>...Considers that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, including expropriation of land and properties thereon, which tend to change the legal status of Jerusalem are invalid and cannot change that status; [and] Urgently calls upon Israel to rescind all such measures already taken and to desist forthwith from taking any further action which tends to change the status of Jerusalem...</blockquote>Or UNSC Resolution 267, unanimously adopted, which affirmed the conclusions of UNSC Resolution 252, as did UNSC Resolution 298 (one abstention), UNSC Resoluition 476 (one abstention) and UNSC Resolution 478 (one abstention)? <br />
<br />
<b>Maybe Bibi forgot that, unlike the General Assembly, resolutions passed by the Security Council are indeed <u>binding</u>?</b><br />
<br />
Maybe he forgot that in 1993 the UNSC approved a report by the Secretary General which concluded beyond doubt that the law applicable in armed conflict as embodied in the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 and the Hague Convention (IV) of 18 October 1907 had become part of international customary law, and thus applied even if the other party was not a High Contracting Party (as is the case in Palestine)?<br />
<br />
Did he simply imagine that at the end of each of these resolutions is the caveat "if and only if Israel is recognized as a Jewish state," thus exempting Israel from its legal obligations?<br />
<br />
Or perhaps Erekat is right, and Bibi really is just playing games. Setting aside the composition of Israel's demand of recognition as a Jewish state (which is ridiculous in and of itself), the mere act of setting preconditions for compliance with international law attests to Netanyahu's seemingly limitless arrogance. He honestly thinks he can shift the blame for the disintegration of peace talks by throwing bones to the PA, which already affirmed Israel's right to exist (sans the racist classification) in 1993. He clearly believes that through slight of hand he can simultaneously eviscerate the Right of Return for Palestinian refugees, and strengthen the codification of Arab subjugation in Israel all in exchange for what exactly? "An additional suspension of building for <b>a limited period of time</b>," says Bibi. Will this be the same kind of "suspension" that still allowed for unhindered construction in East Jerusalem, for the razing of Palestinian villages and confiscation of private Palestinian property, and for continued work on current projects which would most likely include the 3,000 that began as soon as the last "suspension" ended?<br />
<br />
Let's just <i>hope</i> this doesn't constitute the kind of gesture Obama promised to prostitute US taxpayers in order to coax out of the Israeli government.Maggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5903137044472734500.post-36689324470806547702010-10-04T03:51:00.000-07:002010-10-04T17:49:21.300-07:00What Obama Hasn't Changed About the Mid East Peace Process<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://thumbbook.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/barack_obama_change_fairey.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://thumbbook.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/barack_obama_change_fairey.jpg" width="203" /></a></div><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">Forgive my cynicism, but you will not see me holding my breath in anticipation of a comprehensive and just conclusion to the Arab-Israeli conflict, not this time around, not even with Mr. Change himself at the helm of negotiations. To illustrate my point, and for the benefit of all of you following along at home, let me recap what <i>hasn’t</i> changed with the most recent incarnation of peace talks: </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>The Past: </b>Israel has done its best to extort the United States government in exchange for participation in or acceptance of peace initiatives. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">For example, in exchange for Israel’s participation at the 1991 Madrid Conference, the United States was forced to instrument the revocation of UN Resolution 3379, which equated Zionism (the ideological foundation of which presumes that Jews as a distinct ethnic group have exclusive and special rights in contrast with other ethnic groups) with racism (the ideological foundation of which presumes that a distinct ethnic group has exclusive and special rights in contrast with other ethnic groups). </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">In another instance, President Nixon was only able to persuade the Knesset to formally accept UN Resolution 242, which called for withdrawal from the territories Israel captured in 1967 (and to this day still occupies in part, in contravention of international law) by giving “private assurances that Israel would receive additional US aircraft,” according to John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, authors of <i>The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy</i>. Similarly, “[Israel’s] acceptance of the cease-fire that ended the so-called War of Attrition with Egypt…was bought by a US pledge to accelerate aircraft deliveries to Israel, to provide advanced electronic countermeasures against Egypt’s Soviet-supplied anti-aircraft missiles, and, more generally, to maintain the balance of power.” </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">In fact, as Mearsheimer and Walt point out:</div><blockquote><div class="MsoNormal">This pattern continued though the 1970’s, with Presidents Nixon, Ford and Carter pledging ever-larger sums of aid in the course of the disengagement talks with Egypt and during the negotiations that lead to the 1978 Camp David Accords and the 1979 Egypt-Israeli Peace Treaty…In much the same way, , the Clinton administration gave Israel increased assistance as part of the peace treaty with Jordan in 1994, and Clinton’s efforts to advance the Oslo peace process led him to pledge an additional $1.2 billion in military ai to Israel to win Israel’s acceptance of the 1998 Wye Agreement [which Netanyahu promptly suspended].</div></blockquote><div class="MsoNormal">Before being supplanted by Iraq in 2005, Israel was the number one annual recipient of US foreign aid, followed by Egypt and Jordan respectively. It is common knowledge that Egypt and Jordan receive these US funds with the precondition that they maintain peaceful relations with Israel. In this way, the US essentially picks up the tab for Israeli aggression. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>The Present: </b>According to <a href="http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3962560,00.html">Ynetnews</a> among other sources, Israel’s leading Likud party has demanded concessions and guarantees from the Obama Administration in exchange for extending its settlement “freeze,” despite the fact that the entire international community including the United States regards these settlements as completely illegal. Apparently Obama is taking the bait, though the specifics of his pay-off to the Israeli mob are disputed. The Guardian <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/30/israel-obama-netanyahu-peace-talks">reports</a> that Obama sent Netanyahu a letter which requests a “60-day renewal of the freeze. In return, Obama guarantees to demand no further extensions, to ensure that the future of Jewish settlements would become part of final status negotiations, and to veto any United Nations Security Council resolution relating to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict over the next year, while talks continue. He pledges to support a continued Israeli military presence in the Jordan Valley after the establishment of a Palestinian state. The letter also acknowledges Israel’s security needs and the need to upgrade its defense capabilities, and promises to consult Israel and the Arab states on US policy on Iran.” </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><b>The Past: </b>When carrots don’t work, the US has with increasing rarity attempted to use sticks to incentivize Israeli compliance with US policy objectives. In the past 30 years, Israel has come to understand such threats as purely symbolic gestures, as no president has made good on their harsh words.<br />
<br />
Case in point: Mearsheimer and Walt point out, “In 1991, the first Bush administration pressured the Shamir government to stop building settlements and to attend a planned peace conference by withholding the $10 billion loan guarantee, but the suspension lasted only a few months and the guarantees were approved once Yitzhak Rabin replaced Shamir as prime minister.” While Israel agreed to halt construction of new settlements, it continued to expand the existing blocs and the settlements grew at a rate almost 10 times faster than the natural growth of Israel Proper’s population.<br />
<br />
<b>The Present: </b>In the first week of January, under the direction of Obama, Middle East Envoy George Mitchell had <a href="http://www.ynet.co.il/english/articles/0,7340,L-3831661,00.html">stern words</a> for the Israeli government, threatening to withhold aid if the country did not make decisive moves toward peace, including making good on its promise to halt settlement construction. However, just as before, Israel called Mitchell’s bluff, holding the moratorium in word more than deed, as <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39332756?ocid=twitter">new settlement construction only decreased by 50%</a>, existing blocs grew, and Israel continued to <a href="http://www.imemc.org/article/59485">seize Palestinian land</a>. Even as the moratorium has expired, directly resulting in the cessation of negotiations, aid to Israel is not in jeopardy.<br />
<br />
<b>The Past: </b>In 1975 President Reagan and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger were becoming impatient with Israel’s “intransigence to disengage with Egypt” as Mearsheimer put it. Both called for a reassessment of US aid to Israel, but were stymied by an AIPAC-sponsored letter penned by 76 senators concerned with maintaining current levels of military and economic support. Reagan and Kissenger were then forced to pursue other methods of negotiation.<br />
<br />
<b>The Present: </b>87 senators have <a href="http://resistingoccupation.blogspot.com/2010/09/dissecting-united-states-senates.html">written a letter</a> to President Obama, whole-heartedly supported by AIPAC, urging him to make sure Abbas does not leave the negotiating table regardless of the resumption of Israeli settlement construction. In response Israel News reports the administration is pressuring Abbas “not to quit the talks regardless of whether Israel extends the moratorium or not.”<br />
<br />
<b>The Past: </b>Undermining the US’s stated policy objective of achieving nuclear non-proliferation in the Middle East, Israel is currently the only power in the region known to have nuclear and chemical weapons. President Kennedy eventually relegated on his efforts to have IAEA officials properly appraise Israel’s nuclear ambitions, while President Johnson, confronted with the knowledge that the country had in fact acquired WMD, chose to ignore this reality.<br />
<br />
<b>The Present: </b>Last month the IAEA <a href="http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/middleeast/news/article_1586854.php">failed to pass a resolution</a> aimed at Israel’s WMD program, with 51 mostly Western countries (spearheaded by the United States) voting against it, citing the possibility that the resolution would undermine peace negotiations. Before the incident, Obama explained his <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/obama-strongly-opposes-singling-out-of-israel-at-nuclear-conference-1.292804">strong opposition</a> to singling out Israel on the issue of non-proliferation. The irony is clearly lost on him.<br />
<br />
<b>The Past: </b>In December 1982, during a lame-duck session, Congress attempted to provide a $250 million increase in military aid to Israel in the wake of the invasion of Lebanon, the use of cluster bombs, the illegal use of US weapons for offensive purposes, as well as the IDF’s complicity in the massacres at Sabra and Shatila. Following this move, President Reagan and his new Secretary of State George Shultz reinstituted a 1981 Memorandum of Understanding on strategic cooperation in 1983. <br />
<div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>The Present: </b>In the midst of Operation Cast Lead, which killed more than 1,400 Palestinians and from which Israel was later found to have committed war crimes as well as crimes against humanity (per the Goldstone Report), on January 16<sup>th</sup>, 2009, Congressed signed a <a href="http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Peace+Process/Reference+Documents/Israel-US_Memorandum_of_Understanding_16-Jan-2009.htm?WBCMODE=PresentationUnpAvigdor+Kahalani">Memorandum of Understanding</a> essentially endorsing the operation and pledging unconditional support for the State of Israel. While vocal on a number of policy issues before his inauguration, Obama <a href="http://www.prisonplanet.com/chomsky-obama-oked-israels-gaza-war.html">said nothing of this development</a>, and has yet to negatively address the MOU. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">For those of us concerned with history, it has become increasingly evident that there is nothing new to discuss. Palestinians are still not represented by a competent, unified and truly legitimate leadership. Israel is still employing the same tired tactics. But what’s most disheartening about the latest spectacle is Obama’s handling of the situation. Far from being the beacon of hope and progress he claimed himself to be in Cairo (does anyone remember, “<a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-by-the-President-at-Cairo-University-6-04-09/">It’s time for these settlements to stop,</a>” or was I just hearing things?), Obama has shown he is no different from his predecessors.</div>Maggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5903137044472734500.post-78868870862447907462010-10-01T12:29:00.000-07:002010-10-05T20:57:20.048-07:00Israel Attempts to Extort US Government<span class="text14">Just a few hours ago, Ynetnews published the following <a href="http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3962560,00.html">story</a>: </span><br />
<br />
<blockquote><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/bst/en/img/content/querformat/Fahne_Israel_USA_260x180.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="137" src="http://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/bst/en/img/content/querformat/Fahne_Israel_USA_260x180.jpg" width="200" /></a></div><span class="text14">Senior Likud officials have told Ynet that they would support a two-month extension of the settlement construction freeze in exchange for guarantees from the United States.</span></blockquote><blockquote><span class="text14">Likud sources noted that a "significant" incentive package would help the prime minister receive the approval of the cabinet or any other forum. (Attila Somfalvi)</span></blockquote><br />
Could Israeli thuggery be any more evident? "We will stop breaking international law, undermining Palestinian statehood and violating human rights, <b>temporarily, </b>IF and only if the United States makes it worth our while."<br />
<br />
This stands in the face of the fact that according to a 2010 <a href="http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL33222.pdf">congressional report</a>, "Israel is the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign assistance since World War II. From 1976-2004, Israel was the largest annual recipient of U.S. foreign assistance, having been supplanted by Iraq. Since 1985, the United States has provided nearly $3 billion in grants annually to Israel."<br />
<br />
The same report indicates:<br />
<blockquote>"In August 2007, the Bush Administration announced that it would increase U.S. military assistance to Israel by $6 billion over the next decade. The agreement calls for incremental annual increases in Foreign Military Financing (FMF) to Israel, reaching $3 billion a year by FY2012. For FY2010, the Obama Administration requested $2.775 billion in FMF to Israel. Congress provided $555 million of Israel's total FY2010 FMF appropriation in P.L. 111-32, the FY2009 Supplemental Appropriations Act." </blockquote>What's more:<br />
<blockquote>Almost all U.S. bilateral aid to Israel is in the form of military assistance. In the past, Israel also had received significant economic assistance. Strong congressional support for Israel has resulted in Israel’s receiving benefits not available to other countries. For example, Israel can use some U.S. military assistance both for research and development in the United States and for military purchases from Israeli manufacturers. In addition, all U.S. foreign assistance earmarked for Israel is delivered in the first 30 days of the fiscal year. Most other recipients normally receive aid in installments. Congress also appropriates funds for joint U.S.-Israeli missile defense programs.</blockquote><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div>Really, Israel? REALLY? You want to extort my wallet to pay for your <a href="http://resistingoccupation.blogspot.com/2010/10/settler-violence-in-occupied-west-bank.html">brutalization</a> of Palestinians, on top of the mountains of aid and arms I and my fellow taxpayers are forced to hand you so promptly? Government-subsidized donations to your settlement projects aren't good enough? No, you'd like to play mob boss now?<br />
<br />
The Israeli government is nothing but a gang of ungrateful, petulant brats. Clearly, the spoiling has gone to their heads and rotted their brains. The most frightening thing is, I don't think any American has the confidence to assert that Obama will reject this idea wholesale.Maggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5903137044472734500.post-76044695106308198772010-10-01T00:24:00.000-07:002010-10-01T00:40:56.537-07:00Settler Violence in the Occupied West Bank<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://revista-amauta.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/israel-settlement.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="300" src="http://revista-amauta.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/israel-settlement.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><div class="MsoNormal">Settlements are illegal under international law. This is an indisputable fact. But the act of settlement itself, confiscating Palestinian land and transferring Israeli citizens onto it, is not the only problem. In reality, settlement of the West Bank brings along with it an axis of control over Palestinian livelihood, hindering construction in Palestinian villages to accommodate their natural growth, monopolizing resources, poisoning the environment and strangling the economy with limits on movement and access to farmland among other injustices. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
Most disturbing, yet hardly reported in the mainstream media, is the horrendous phenomenon of settler violence against the indigenous Palestinian population. Worse yet, settlers who attack Palestinians and their property act with utter impunity, rarely if ever being punished. When settlers <i>are</i> held accountable for their actions, punishments are usually laughable at best. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">In a lecture (slideshow available <a href="http://www.thejerusalemfund.org/ht/display/ContentDetails/i/15569">here</a>) given by the Executive Director of the Palestine Center, Yousef Munayyer on September 15<sup>th</sup>, he revealed that between 2009 and 2010 settlers committed at least 1,000 separate acts of violence against individuals or their property. This destruction originated in at least two-thirds of settlements, the majority of which coming from the most religious, and predominantly in the form of stone throwing, trespassing, assault, destruction of property and arson. 90% of these attacks took place in areas where Israel has security jurisdiction under the Oslo Accords. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="sub-title">As the Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem explains in “<a href="http://www.btselem.org/english/Settler_Violence/Nature_of_the_Violence.asp">The Nature of the Violence</a>:” </div><div class="sub-title"></div><blockquote><div class="runing-text">From the beginning of the [Al Aqsa] Intifada, in late September 2000, to the end of 2004, Israeli civilians have killed thirty-four Palestinians in the Occupied Territories. In some of these cases, the Israelis acted in life-threatening situations, such as when armed Palestinians infiltrated Israeli settlements. In many cases, however, the Israeli civilians did not act in self-defense. This occurred, for example, in those instance in which Israelis chased stone-throwers and fired at them as a form of “punishment.” Acts of this kind violate the penal law and the open-fire regulations applying to civilians. </div><div class="runing-text"><br />
</div><div class="runing-text">Israelis, individually or in organized groups, carry out the attacks on Palestinians and Palestinian property to frighten, deter, or punish them, using weapons and ammunition they received from the IDF. The settlers sometimes act in retaliation for violence committed by Palestinians, and sometimes not.</div><div class="runing-text"><br />
</div><div class="runing-text">The actions against Palestinians include blocking roadways, so as to impede Palestinian life and commerce. The settlers also shoot solar panels on roofs of buildings, torch automobiles, shatter windowpanes and windshields, destroy crops, uproot trees, abuse merchants and owners of stalls in the market. Some of these actions are intended to force Palestinians to leave their homes and farmland, and thereby enable the settlers to gain control of them.</div><div class="runing-text"><br />
</div><span class="runing-text1">During the olive-picking season, when many Palestinians are at work in the orchards, settler violence increases. The violence takes the form of gunfire, which sometimes results in casualties among the Palestinian olive-pickers, destruction of trees, and theft of Palestinian crops.</span></blockquote><div class="MsoNormal">A <a href="http://www.yesh-din.org/Report/ASemblanceofLaw-Eng.pdf">study</a> conducted by the Israeli human rights organization Yesh Din on offenses between 2005 and 2006 indicates that of those reported to the Judea and Samaria (Israel’s renaming of the West Bank) District of the Israel Police:</div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><blockquote><ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc"><li class="MsoNormal">More than 90% of the complaints and files in which the investigation was completed here closed without indictments being submitted.</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">96% of the files on trespassing (including all the cases of harming trees) in which the investigation was completed were closed without indictments being submitted.</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">100% of the property offenses in which the investigation was completed were closed without indictments being submitted.</li>
<li class="MsoNormal">79% of the assault files in which the investigation was completed were closed without indictments being submitted. </li>
<li class="MsoNormal">About 5% of the complaints filed were lost and apparently were never investigated.</li>
</ul></blockquote><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div class="MsoNormal">B’Tselem <a href="http://www.btselem.org/english/Settler_Violence/Law_Enforcement.asp">elucidates</a>:</div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><blockquote><div class="MsoNormal">This policy is in total contrast to the rigid policy of law enforcement and punishment where Palestinians harm Israelis. Towns and villages in the area of the incident are routinely placed under curfew, which has at times lasted for many days, and intensive searches and arrests are made. In many cases, Israel demolished or sealed the suspect's home. Palestinians who are tried and convicted for offenses against Israelis are given maximum punishment.</div></blockquote><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div class="MsoNormal">The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights does its best to document all incidents of settler violence, which can be found in its <a href="http://www.pchrgaza.org/portal/en/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=84&Itemid=183">weekly reports</a> on Israeli human rights violations in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Since the “moratorium” on settlement construction has ended, even more will be built and expanded to accommodate the ever-growing settler population, at least 40% of which will be from Jewish immigrants from abroad rather than natural growth, and one can expect the violence to only escalate. As recently as Tuesday, <a href="http://www.imemc.org/article/59490">two new incidents</a> were reported to the International Middle East Media Center. In the village of Qaryut, south of Nablus, settlers broke the home of Najla'a Abdelfattah and threatened to kill her. They were only forced to leave when a group of youths came to her defense. The report goes on to say, “Near the northern city of Nablus, another group of settlers trespassed into the olive orchards in the village of Awarta, and stole olives. The villagers told media the settlers came form the nearby settlement of Yitzahar, adding that this is not the first time they invade the fields and steal the olives.” </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">These are the consequences of the policy the European Union <a href="http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article11541.shtml">subsidizes</a>, the consequences of the policy countless US citizens endorse with the government’s <a href="http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2009/mar/27/lz1e27ignatiu213329-us-funds-israeli-settlements/">help</a>, that the US Senate has deemed <a href="http://resistingoccupation.blogspot.com/2010/09/dissecting-united-states-senates.html">immaterial to peace negotiations</a> and that the international community has done nothing to stop (excluding the occasional hollow condemnation, followed up by...nothing). Who will hold Israel, its army and its settlers accountable? Who will come to the aid of the defenseless population of the Occupied West Bank? If Abbas doesn’t walk away from peace negotiations after consulting with the Arab League this week, the unfortunate answer will most likely be no one.</div>Maggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5903137044472734500.post-31615611386032164382010-09-29T11:41:00.000-07:002010-10-01T10:37:03.645-07:00Legitimizing Ethnic Cleansing: Leibermann and Ayalon<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.pls48.net/upload/upload/2010/9/06092010/avigdorlieberman.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="144" src="http://www.pls48.net/upload/upload/2010/9/06092010/avigdorlieberman.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>In a recent Ynetnews <a href="http://www.ynet.co.il/english/articles/0,7340,L-3958403,00.html">piece</a> on the September 21st meeting between Palestinian "Prime Minister" Salam Fayyad and <span class="text14">Deputy Foreign Minister Daniel Ayalon, Fayyad showed the makings of a backbone (a shocking development for the PA) as he left "</span><span class="text14">outraged...following a dispute about terminology to be used in the meeting summary." Fayyad objected to the addition of the phrase "for two peoples" to the reference of a "two state solution" on the meeting's summary.</span><br />
<br />
<span class="text14">According to the article's comments, his stance perplexed and irritated many pro-Israel readers. As one reader explains:</span><br />
<blockquote>Even the "moderate" Fayyad admits that the Palestinians will NEVER accept Israel as a Jewish state. They want to have the cake, and eat it too: a Palestinian state in the 1967 borders, PLUS Israel ceasing to be a Jewish state, and absorbing masses of Palestinian refugees. This proves nothing had changed in the Palestinian ideology through history - they didn't accept a Jewish homeland in 1948, and they still don't accept a Jewish homeland in 2010. This clearly proves they are still not ripe for peace.<span class="text14"> </span></blockquote>Clearly, his poster sees nothing wrong with the concept of Israel as an exclusively Jewish state. However, as Salon writer Ben White points out in his <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/israel/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2010/08/19/israel_1948_right_exist">article,</a> "1948 and Israel's Deceptive Bargaining Position," what the author of the above comment forgets is this:<br />
<blockquote>Such a demand, and understanding why it is <u><a href="http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/news/2007/03/eggs_fail_to_re.html" style="color: black;" target="_blank">so unacceptable</a> </u> to Palestinians, means going back to 1948 -- when hundreds of Palestinian towns and villages were destroyed, their inhabitants forbidden from returning by the new Jewish state -- and throwing the spotlight on two groups of Palestinians that the so-called peace process has ignored or marginalized: the refugees of '48 (and their descendants) and the Palestinian minority that's left inside Israel. The unpleasant reality is that Israel as "a Jewish state" means the permanent exile and dispossession of the former, and the colonial control of the latter.</blockquote>Essentially, insisting that Fayyad agree to describe the emergence of a Palestinian state along ethnic lines implies his acquiescence to subjugating "Israeli Arabs" aka Palestinians who survived the Nakba to second class citizenship within Israel, while at the same time legitimizing the ethnic cleansing of those whose villages were razed or worse, those who were murdered under the direction of Plan Dalet.<br />
<br />
In the wake of Fayyad's refusal come the ever-repugnant musings of Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman to the UN General Assembly. Exchanging his words on forcible population transfers for the slightly less (but not by much) insane position of "moving borders to better reflect demographic realities," thus drawing Arabs out of their country by slight of hand rather than at gunpoint, Lieberman makes his racism evident.<br />
<br />
Netanyahu has done his best to distance himself from Lieberman, having his office issue the statement, "The content of the foreign minister's speech at the United Nations was not coordinated with the prime minister. Prime Minister Netanyahu is the one who is managing the political negotiations of the state of Israel." But the truth of the matter is this: Netanyahu, Ayalon and Lieberman are cut from the same cloth. Demanding the recognition of Israel as an exclusively Jewish state, and dividing the land along ethnic lines are simply variations on a theme. The Israeli obsession with a demographic Jewish majority attests to one thing: the inherent racist character of Zionism. If you belong to the wrong ethnic group, you have no right to the land you were born in. And if you ask the poster mentioned above, an unwillingness to accept <i>this</i> position is the reason Palestinians have seen no peace. If these are the terms for peace, who would want it?Maggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5903137044472734500.post-73935149254436006052010-09-29T00:19:00.000-07:002010-09-29T00:32:55.568-07:00IDF: The Most Moral Army in the World?<div style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: right;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://noliesradio.org/images/FreedomFlotilla_free-gaza.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://noliesradio.org/images/FreedomFlotilla_free-gaza.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="266" src="http://noliesradio.org/images/FreedomFlotilla_free-gaza.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>According to the newly published report by the Human Rights Council (<a href="http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/15session/A.HRC.15.21_en.pdf">PDF</a>), the United Nations fact finding mission into Israel's attack on the Gaza Freedom Flotilla elucidates the manner in which, upon illegally boarding the Mavi Marmara, the Israeli Defense Force killed nine passengers, and put another in a coma. The Human Rights Council went so far as to say that the "circumstances of the killing of at least six of the passengers were in a manner consistent with an extra-legal, arbitrary and summary execution." Further reading of the report reveals violations encompassing the following crimes within the terms of article 147 of the Fourth Geneva Convention:<br />
<br />
<ul><li>wilful killing;</li>
<li>torture or inhuman treatment;</li>
<li>wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health. </li>
</ul><br />
The Mission also considers that a series of violations of Israel’s obligations under international human rights law have taken place, including:<br />
<br />
<ul><li>right to life (article 6, ICCPR);</li>
<li>torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (article 7, ICCPR; CAT);</li>
<li>right to liberty and security of the person and freedom from arbitrary arrest or detention (article 9, ICCPR)</li>
<li> right of detainees to be treated with humanity and respect for the inherent dignity of the human person (article 10, ICCPR);</li>
<li>freedom of expression (article 19, ICCPR).</li>
</ul><br />
In combating Israeli propaganda on the subject, so malicious as to attempt to dishonor these humanitarians as "terrorists," one must give special attention to the circumstances in which they gave their lives. This is how they died:<br />
<br />
<i><u>Deaths occurring on the Top Deck (roof)</u></i><br />
<br />
<b>Furkan Doğan</b><br />
<br />
Furkan Doğan, a nineteen-year old with dual Turkish and United States citizenship, was on the central area of the top deck filming with a small video camera when he was first hit with live fire. It appears that he was lying on the deck in a conscious, or semi-conscious, state for some time. It total Furkan received five bullet wounds, to the face, head, back thorax, left leg and foot. All of the entry wounds were on the back of his body, except for the face wound which entered to the right of his nose. According to forensic analysis, tattooing around the wound in his face indicates that the shot was delivered <b>at</b> <b>point blank range</b>. Furthermore, the trajectory of the wound, from bottom to top, together with a vital abrasion to the left shoulder that could be consistent with the bullet exit point, is compatible with the shot being received while he was <b>lying on the ground on his back</b>. The other wounds were not the result of firing in contact, near contact or close range, but it is not otherwise possible to determine the exact firing range. The wounds to the leg and foot were most likely received in a standing position.<br />
<br />
<b>İbrahim Bilgen</b><br />
<br />
İbrahim Bilgen, a 60 year old Turkish citizen, from Siirt in Turkey, was on the top deck and was one of the first passengers to be shot. He received a bullet wound to the chest, the trajectory of which was<b> from above and not at close range</b>. He had a further two bullet wounds to the right side of the back and right buttock, both back to front. These wounds would not have caused instant death, but he would have bled to death within a short time without medical attention. Forensic evidence shows that he was shot in the side of the head<br />
with a soft baton round at such close proximity and that an entire bean bag and its wadding penetrated the skull and lodged in the brain. He had a further bruise on the right flank consistent with another beanbag wound. The wounds are consistent with the deceased initially being shot from soldiers on board the helicopter above and receiving a further wound to the head while<b> lying on the ground, already wounded</b>.<br />
<br />
<b>Fahri Yaldiz</b><br />
<br />
Fahri Yaldiz, a 42 year old Turkish citizen from Adiyaman, received five bullet wounds, one to the chest, one to the left leg and three to the right leg. The chest wound was caused by a bullet that entered near the left nipple and hit the heart and lungs before exiting from the shoulder. This injury would have caused rapid death.<br />
<br />
<b>Ali Heyder Bengi</b><br />
<br />
According to the pathology report, Ali Heyder Bengi, a 38 year old Turkish citizen from Diyarbakir, received six bullet wounds (one in the chest, one in the abdomen, one in the right arm, one in the right thigh and two in the left hand). One bullet lodged in the chest area. None of the wounds would have been instantly fatal, but damage to the liver caused bleeding which would have been fatal if not stemmed. There are several witness accounts which suggest that Israeli soldiers shot the deceased <b>in the back and chest at close</b> range while he was <b>lying on the deck</b> as a consequence of initial bullet wounds.<br />
<br />
<i><u>Deaths occurring on the Bridge Deck, portside</u></i><br />
<b><br />
Cevdet Kiliçlar</b><br />
<br />
Cevdet Kiliçlar, a 38 year old Turkish citizen from Istanbul, was on the Mavi Marmara, in his capacity as a photographer employed by IHH. At the moment he was shot he was standing on the bridge deck on the port side of the ship near to the door leading to the main stairwell and was <b>attempting to photograph Israeli soldiers</b> on the top deck. According to the pathology reports, he received a <b>single bullet to his forehead</b> between the eyes. The bullet followed a horizontal trajectory which crossed the middle of the brain from front to back. He would have died instantly.<br />
<br />
<b>Cengiz Akyüz</b> and <b>Cengiz Songür</b><br />
<br />
41 year old Cengiz Akyüz from Hatay and 46 year old Cengiz Songür from Izmir, both Turkish citizens, were injured on the bridge deck in close succession by live fire from above. They had been sheltering and were <b>shot as they attempted to move inside the door leading to the stairwell</b>. Cengiz Akyüz received a shot to the head and it is probable that he died instantly.<br />
<br />
The pathology report shows four wounds: to the neck, face, chest and thigh. Cengiz Songür received a single bullet to the upper central thorax below the neck, shot from a high angle, which lodged in the right thoracic cavity injuring the heart and aorta. Unsuccessful efforts were made by doctors inside the ship to resuscitate him through heart massage.<br />
<br />
<b>Çetin Topçuoğlu</b><br />
<br />
Çetin Topçuoğlu, a 54 year old Turkish citizen from Adana had been involved in helping to bring injured passengers inside the ship to be treated. He was also shot close to the door on the bridge deck. He did not die instantly and his wife, who was also on board the ship, was with him when he died. He was shot by three bullets. One bullet entered from the top the soft tissues of the right side of the back of the head, exited from the neck and then re-entered into the thorax. Another bullet entered the left buttock and lodged in the right pelvis. The third entered the right groin and exited from the lower back. There are indications that the victim may have been in a <b>crouching or bending position</b> when this wound was sustained. Deaths and seriously wounded occurring in unknown locations.<br />
<br />
<b>Necdet Yildirim</b><br />
<br />
The location and circumstances of the shooting and death of Necdet Yildirim, a 31 year old Turkish citizen from Istanbul, remain unclear. He was shot twice in the thorax, once from the front and once from the back. The trajectory of both bullets was <b>from top to bottom</b>. He also received bruises consistent with plastic bullet impact.<br />
<br />
Wounding of <b>Uğur Suleyman</b> <b>Söylemez </b>(in a coma)<br />
<br />
The serious nature of wounds to Uğur Suleyman Söylemez, a 46 year old Turkish citizen from Ankara, which include at least one bullet wound to the head, have left the victim in a coma in an Ankara hospital. He remains in a critical condition with a serious head injury.<br />
<br />
<br />
[in all cases, emphasis added]Maggie Sagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18058828846838674764noreply@blogger.com0