August 21, 2010

Barak to U.S., France: Take steps to stop Lebanese flotilla: Haaretz

After announced delay in departure of women’s flotilla, Defense Minister speaks with foreign ministers of U.S. and France, stresses that flotilla is an “unnecessary provocation.”

Defense Minister Ehud Barak spoke on Saturday with U.S. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, U.S. National Security Adviser General Jim Jones, and French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, and asked them to act to prevent the launch of the Lebanese flotilla setting for Gaza.

The Defense Minister emphasized that Israel permits the import of civilian materials into Gaza after it is checked at the port of Ashdod. Therefore, he said, “The flotilla’s attempt to reach Gaza is a needless provocation.”

Earlier in the day, the organizers of the women’s flotilla from Lebanon to Gaza announced that the ships would not set sail on Sunday. Apparently, the reason for the delay is Cyprus’s refusal to allow the ships to pass through its territorial waters or to drop anchor in one of its ports.

“We will not set sail tomorrow,” Samar Al Haj, one of the flotilla organizers, said to the Reuters news agency. “We have encountered difficulties. We will try to set sail from another port, we won’t give up so easily.”

On Thursday, the Israeli delegation to the United Nations submitted a complaint to the general secretary of the organization and to the head of its security council. The complaint stated that the flotilla is a needless provocation, and that there are acceptable ways of transferring aid to Gaza.

Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said that all of the other states in the region, including those that do not have diplomatic relations with Israel, understand that any such flotilla will only cause damage to the whole region. “We hope that this understanding will lead to cooperation to prevent the provocations,” Lieberman said.

Earlier Friday, Defense Minister Barak said that the women’s flotilla intends to aid terror groups. “The flotilla planning to set sail from Lebanon has nothing to do with humanitarian goals, it is a hostile irritation,” he said in a Defense Ministry statement.

Emily Henochowicz: artist to pro-Palestinian activist: The Guardian

Jewish-American Emily Henochowicz recalls how she lost an eye at a protest in Israel after the storming of the Gaza aid flotilla
Ed Pilkington

Emily Henochowicz lost an eye when she was hit by a tear gas cannister fired by Israeli troops at a pro-Palestinian protest. Photograph: Tim Knox

As a student artist, Emily Henochowicz has always been fascinated by the way the brain processes visual signals to form images of the physical world around us. That has been a theme of her work at the prestigious New York art college, Cooper Union, which she joined three years ago.

In her first term she made a costume out of papier-mache for the inaugural freshman’s parade that neatly expressed that fascination. It was meant to be a monster cyclops, but the way it came out it resembled a giant eyeball with her arms and legs sticking out of it.

For more than a year she has used a photograph of that eyeball as the icon of her art blog, thirsty pixels. It is all too ironic, she laughs now. The irony is that in May Henochowicz became – in her own words – a cyclops. She lost her left eye as she was demonstrating against Israeli government policy in the Palestinian occupied territories.

With her loss, she became yet another casualty of the ongoing Israeli occupation. But what makes Henochowicz’s story singular was that her experiences were filtered through the lens, the eye, of an artist.

It was art that took her to the Middle East in the first place. She signed up to an animation course in Jerusalem that suited her passion for drawing.

Her choice of Jerusalem had little to do with the fact that she was the granddaughter of Holocaust survivors, or that her father was born in Israel and that she herself was Jewish and an Israeli citizen. It had even less to do with any political beliefs she might have on either side of the Israeli-Palestinian divide, though she had been disturbed by Israel’s conduct in the Gaza war of 2008-9.

It was all about art. But a month after she arrived in Jerusalem, an Israeli friend and peace activist took her into Palestinian East Jerusalem. That day changed everything.

“It was a little bit shocking,” she says, recalling the event in a Manhattan cafe. “Suddenly a huge group of Hassidim came down the street. These little Palestinian kids – just five or six years old – linked arms and were standing in the middle of the street. The Hassidim were on the other side, singing prayers at them. It was such a powerful image for me: that line of children, so strong and defiant, this huge group of adults in front of them.”

The next day Henochowicz captured the moment in a dramatic painting that shows the children in front of a swirl of black-clad Jewish men. And then she acted on impulse – something that as an artist she says she is wont to do. She went to Ramallah on the West Bank and joined the protest campaign the International Solidarity Movement.

Over the next few weeks Henochowicz threw herself into the fray, protesting outside Israeli settlements in the West Bank and along the separation wall. She was aware of the dangers, not least because it was with the ISM that fellow-American Rachel Corrie had been demonstrating in 2003 when she was crushed to death by a bulldozer.

“I had a fear the whole time I was going to get hit with tear gas,” Henochowicz says. “I knew the way that it was used. Forget UN regulations, this is Israel, the rules don’t apply here – tear gas is fired directly into crowds.”

At first she kept what she was doing from her parents, certain that they would disapprove. But eventually she told them.

“They were incredibly upset, particularly my dad. He had been to Yeshiva, Jewish school, and speaks Hebrew.’ How could you do this to me?’ he said, but I wasn’t doing it to him.”

Paradoxically, shortly before the incident in which she lost her eye, Henochowicz decided, partly out of concern for her parents, that she would avoid demonstrations and dedicate herself instead to teaching art to Palestinian children. But on the morning of 31 May she awoke to the news that a Turkish flotilla attempting to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza had been raided and nine activists killed.

Mayhem and confusion ensued. She was swept along by the reaction, and found herself at a protest rally at the Qaladiya checkpoint, facing Israeli soldiers. “I was scared in a way I’d never been before.”

It was so quick, maybe just a minute from the first stones being thrown to the tear gas canister striking her in the face.

“I remember a weird crunch feeling and thinking, ‘Oh, I’ve been hit!’ Then there was the thought: ‘Hey guys, my brain’s ok! My brain’s ok!”

“And then I remember falling back and being held, and cameras rushing to me and clicking away and me thinking ‘Oh, I’ve become one of those images’.”

She was treated in a hospital in Ramallah and Jerusalem before returning to Maryland in the US. She has had multiple operations for a fractured skull as well as losing the eye.

The Israeli government has refused to pay thousands of dollars in medical costs, on the grounds that Henochowicz chose to put herself at risk and that she was hit by mistake by a ricochet.

“That’s preposterous,” she says. “A ricochet? From what wall? Where? How? This was no ricochet.”

Henochowicz is now preparing for term to start at Cooper Union. She wears a pair of glasses, the left lens of which she has painted with swirls to obscure the empty socket behind it.

She says she has adapted with amazing speed to the loss. “I go through a lot of my days not even thinking that I’m seeing only through one eye. I’m so fine in other ways, I’m perfectly healthy.”

She stresses how unfair she thinks it is that she gets so much attention, while Palestinians who are injured with depressing frequency go without notice. “I’m white, I’m Jewish, I’m an Israeli citizen and American. When I’m hit by tear gas there are articles, the Israeli government gets involved. When Palestinians are hit, who gives a shit?”

She doesn’t know what the longer-term impact will be on her art. She remembers telling the doctor who informed her she had lost an eye: “But I’m an artist, that’s not supposed to happen!”

“I’ve been sad because this is a moment in my life I can never escape, and that’s what gets me more than the loss of my eye,” she says. “Twenty years from now I will still carry this moment, and I desperately don’t want it to be the end of my story.”

U.S.: Iran’s nuclear power plant bears no ‘proliferation risk’: Haaretz

Iran begins fueling its first nuclear power plant which it refers to as ‘start-up of the largest symbol of Iran’s peaceful nuclear activities.’
The United States does not see the fueling of Iran’s first nuclear power plant in Bushehr as a “proliferation risk,” State Department spokesman Darby Holladay said Saturday.
“We recognize that the Bushehr reactor is designed to provide civilian nuclear power and do not view it as a proliferation risk,” Holladay said, adding that “It will be under IAEA safeguards and Russia is providing the fuel and talking back the spit nuclear fuel, which would be the principal source of proliferation concerns.”

Iran began fueling its first nuclear power plant on Saturday, a potent symbol of its growing regional sway and rejection of international sanctions designed to prevent it building a nuclear bomb.

“Russia’s support for Bushehr underscores that Iran does not need an indigenous enrichment capability as its intentions are purely peaceful,” Holladay said. “Russia’s supply of fuel to Iran is the model we and our P5+1 partner have offered to Iran. It is important to remember that the IAEA access to Bushehr is separate from and should not be confused with Iran’s broader obligations to the IAEA. On this score as the IAEA has consistently reported Iran remains in serious violation of its obligations.‬”

Iranian television showed live pictures of Iran’s nuclear chief Ali Akbar Salehi and his Russian counterpart watching a fuel rod assembly being prepared for insertion into the reactor near the Gulf city of Bushehr.

“Despite all the pressures, sanctions and hardships imposed by Western nations, we are now witnessing the start-up of the largest symbol of Iran’s peaceful nuclear activities,” Salehi told a news conference afterwards.

Iranian officials said it would take two to three months before the plant starts producing electricity and would generate 1,000 megawatts, a small proportion of the nation’s 41,000 megawatt electricity demand recorded last month.

Russia designed, built and will supply fuel for Bushehr, taking back spent rods which could be used to make weapons-grade plutonium in order to ease nuclear proliferation concerns.

Saturday’s ceremony comes after decades of delays building the plant, work on which was initially started by German company Siemens in the 1970s, before Iran’s Islamic Revolution.

The United States criticized Moscow earlier this year for pushing ahead with Bushehr given persistent Iranian defiance over its nuclear program.

Moscow supported the latest UN Security Council resolution in June which imposed a fourth round of sanctions and called for Iran to stop uranium enrichment which, some countries fear, could lead it to obtain nuclear weapons.

“The construction of the nuclear plant at Bushehr is a clear example showing that any country, if it abides by existing international legislation and provides effective, open interaction with the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), should have the opportunity to access peaceful use of the atom,” Sergei Kiriyenko, head of Russian state nuclear corporation Rosatom, told the news conference.

The fuelling of Bushehr is a milestone in Iran’s path to harness technology which it says will reduce consumption of its abundant fossil fuels, allowing it to export more oil and gas and to prepare for the day when the minerals riches dry up.

Following the ceremony, Iran’s Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki told the country’s semi-official Fars news agency that his country would continue to enrich its own uranium.

Iran’s neighbours, some of whom are also seeking nuclear power, are wary of Tehran’s nuclear ambitions and its growing influence in the region, notably in Iraq where fellow Shi’ites now dominate and Lebanon, where it is a backer of Hezbollah.

While most nuclear analysts say Bushehr does not add to any proliferation risk, many countries remain deeply concerned about Iran’s uranium enrichment.

EDITOR: We cannot talk to whoever is representing the Palestinians

Ron Prosor, the typically aggressive Israeli ambassador to the UK, is repeating the age-old argument – the same one Israel has used for decades about the PLO and Arafat. The dominant political force in Palestine is always taboo – this is also why Israel has supported the creation of Hamas , so as to destabilise the PLO. Haven’t they just succeeded beyond their wildest dreams? They must feel a little like Dr. Frankenstein, seeing the Creature tear down the neighbourhood…

Israel always preferred to speak about peace to everyone other than the Palestinians – they would love to have peace with Sweden or Micronesia, for example, and somehow, unfairly, are denied the pleasure of such peace talks…

Before we talk to Hamas: The Guardian

No missiles means no blockade. When Israelis feel secure, concessions will follow. It’s that simple
Ron Prosor
Groucho Marx famously quipped: “Those are my principles, and if you don’t like them … well, I have others.” The International Quartet (the US, the UN, Russia and the EU) has long applied three principles Hamas must adopt to take part in negotiations. It must renounce violence, recognise Israel and abide by previous agreements between Israel and the Palestinians. At no point has Hamas satisfied these conditions – or indicated any intention to do so.

Those who advocate talking to Hamas are urging a Groucho-Marxist policy in a complex, unstable region. If Hamas is too extreme to accept these principles, they argue, we must tailor our principles to match Hamas’s extremism.

The Hamas charter advocates the destruction of the state of Israel, the genocidal slaughter of Jews and the imposition of an Islamic state governed by sharia law. When an organisation’s constitution venerates your murder, it is difficult to know how negotiations should begin – perhaps with a discussion of the flowers for one’s funeral.

This week marks the fifth anniversary of Israel’s disengagement from Gaza. We withdrew every Israeli soldier and citizen, gambling on the formula of land for peace. Instead of peace and progress we received missiles and misery. Hamas made Gaza a terrorist enclave, launching thousands of missiles at Israeli civilians.

In 2006 it kidnapped Gilad Shalit, holding him in isolation for four years without a single visit from the Red Cross. In a bloody coup in 2007 Hamas attacked its own people, chasing Fatah out of Gaza and hurling its Palestinian brothers from the rooftops. It imposed an Islamic penal code along with the routine torture and execution of political opponents. Simultaneously it relentlessly attacked Israelis and, with Iranian support, stockpiled weapons that today can hit Tel Aviv.

After years of missiles, the bombardment became unbearable. We targeted the terrorist infrastructure through Operation Cast Lead. Israel has tried to stop the flood of weapons through a naval blockade. When Hamas supporters attempt to break the blockade, as occurred with the Turkish IHH flotilla, Israel’s defensive measures must be understood in context. Hamas recently fired a Grad missile at Ashkelon and dispatched a terror cell from Gaza into Sinai that fired missiles at Eilat in Israel, and Aqaba in Jordan: Hamas threatens not only Israel but also Egypt and Jordan.

Some in the west fondly refer to Hamas as the elected representatives of the Palestinians. While Hamas won the Palestinian council elections in 2006, it was not a mandate to violently overthrow the Palestinian Authority. Nor does it justify terror against Israel. Hamas’s concept of democracy fits that of all democratically elected dictatorships – “one man, one vote … once”.

Gaza was a golden opportunity tragically missed. Instead of building a Mediterranean Dubai, Hamas diverted every resource to enslaving its people while attacking ours. In contrast, Israel and the PA have made significant progress in the West Bank, reducing roadblocks, easing access and stimulating economic growth of 8%. The PA should be encouraged to build on these developments at the negotiating table.

Israel has offered direct talks, recognised a two-state solution and introduced an unprecedented moratorium on settlement construction. President Abbas has declined talks, preferring to campaign against Israel internationally. In Palestinian classrooms and civil society incitement against Israel continues.

Our experience following the Gaza pull-out has scarred the Israeli public. Hamas’s missiles wounded the concept of land for peace, increasing Israeli fears and scepticism. Of the same voters who elected governments that signed peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan and initiated the Oslo Accords, only 32% believe talks with the Palestinians will lead to peace. More than ever, Israelis require confidence-building measures.

When Israelis feel secure concessions follow. Last weekend Israel dismantled the security barrier in Gilo, a Jerusalem suburb that came under heavy Palestinian sniper fire during the second intifada. If in Gilo no sniper fire means no wall, so in Gaza no missiles would mean no blockade. It is that simple.

Sadly Hamas has always torpedoed peace efforts through suicide bombings, kidnappings and missiles. If further steps towards peace are to win Israeli hearts and minds, the price cannot be missiles and mortars in the heart of Israel.

EDITOR: But we will talk to whoever is NOT representing the Palestinians, OK.

Netanyahu understands that Obama is in trouble, with his popularity dropping by the day, and with the super-intelligent population of the strongest ever nation believing increasingly that he is a secret Moslem, Obama needs some action, and quickly. So why not have ‘pece negotiations’ over a year, or even longer? Israel have done this for many decades, and developed the art of negotiating peace while preparing war, and continuing to build, oppress and kill. Nothing new there. Of course, each US president needs to have his own initiative in Palestine. It is part of the job, and guarantees good sales of his memoirs on leaving the Oval Office. It never hurt anyone to have peace talks… So, let us pretend we have not already spent the last four decades killing the so-called Two-State Solution stone dead, and discuss it for few more months. It will be fun.

Israel and Palestinians to resume peace talks in Washington: The Guardian

Hillary Clinton hopes a peace agreement can be reached within a year, in first direct negotiations since 2008
Chris McGreal in Washington and Rachel Shabi in Jerusalem
The US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, said the peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians would aim to ‘resolve all final status issues within one year. Photograph: Kevin Lamarque/Reuters
Israel and the Palestinians are to resume direct peace talks next month under pressure from Washington to break years of political stalemate.

The US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, announced that the Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, and the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, would meet in Washington on 2 September to “relaunch direct negotiations to resolve all final status issues which we believe can be completed within one year”.

Netanyahu welcomed the talks.

“We are coming to these talks with a serious desire to reach a peace agreement between nations, while still preserving Israel’s national interests, security being the foremost of them,” he said.

But some Israeli and Palestinian former negotiators and politicians greeted the news with scepticism, saying Abbas was only participating under US pressure and Netanyahu had no immediate political interest in reaching a peace agreement.

Clinton said the Egyptian and Jordanian leadership had also been invited to the opening of the negotiations, with Tony Blair, the envoy for the quartet of the US, UN, EU and Russia, “in view of his important work to help Palestinians build the institutions of their future state”.

“As we move forward it is important that actions by all sides help to advance our effort not hinder it. There have been difficulties in the past. There will be difficulties ahead. Without a doubt we will hit more obstacles. The enemies of peace will keep trying to defeat us and to derail these talks. But I ask the parties to persevere, to keep moving forward even through difficult times and to continue working to achieve a just and lasting peace in the region,” Clinton said.

The US said all main issues would be on the table, including the difficult final status questions of the borders of a Palestinian state, the division of Jerusalem and the right of return for Palestinian refugees.

The US Middle East envoy, George Mitchell, said he believed it was realistic to include a one-year deadline to resolve core issues on which neither side has been able to reach agreement since the 1993 Oslo peace accords.

“We believe it can be done within a year and that is our objective,” he said. Netanyahu and Abbas were “sincere and serious” about peace, he added, and Washington would take a hands-on role in guiding the talks because it was “in the national security interests of the United States”.

The date for negotiations was set only after the Obama administration pressured Abbas into agreeing to talks. Abbas has sought guarantees from the US that the Palestinians would not be drawn in to perpetual negotiations that go nowhere while Israel continues to expand in the occupied territories. The White House offered the one-year deadline for talks as a reassurance.

A senior Israeli official said that the government recognises that the Palestinians have come to the negotiating table reluctantly and that Abbas is politically weak. But he said that with all issues on the table, there is the potential to make progress.

Asked whether there are red lines for Israel, including Netanyahu’s previous claim to all of Jerusalem, the official said the only unshakeable demands are guarantees of Israel’s security and Palestinian recognition of Israel’s legitimacy.

Mitchell said he accepted there was continued hostility between the two sides but compared the Middle East talks to his experience of “700 days of failure and one day of success” as the Northern Ireland peace broker.

William Hague, the British foreign secretary, said: “A two-state solution is the only hope for lasting peace and security. Today’s announcement is a courageous step towards that goal.”

Moty Cristal, a negotiations expert and adviser to previous Israeli prime ministers, said: “Netanyahu is buying time, looking for ways to stay away from any action on the ground and have more time in leadership. Netanyahu doesn’t think that the Palestinian situation is any threat or has any urgency. The urgency for him is the Iranian affair.”

Abdul Rahman Zidan, a former minister in the Hamas government, said: “Nothing positive will come out of these fruitless talks – we have tried this way several times. The Americans and the Israelis need talks – any talks – just for the feeling that there is a peace process. But for us, this is a negative, empty feeling because there is nothing on the table. It’s a merry-go-round,” he said.

EDITOR: The real issues

For those naive enough to renew their glagging hopes for Middle East just peace by building on the ‘peace talks’ under the aegis of Uncle Obama, just read the article below, to understand what you really can expect from those talks, which is either a totalk capitulation of the Palestinian position, or the continuation of the Status Qup Ante.

ANALYSIS / Netanyahu has won, for now: Haaretz

After a year and a half of political stagnation and Israel’s increasing international isolation, Netanyahu can claim his first diplomatic achievement – even if it is a modest one.
By Barak Ravid
After a year and a half of political stagnation and Israel’s increasing international isolation, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu can claim his first diplomatic achievement – even if it is a modest one.

Direct peace negotiations with the Palestinian Authority, which are set to re-launch on September 2 in Washington, will begin in accordance with the conditions on which Netanyahu insisted. However, the talks themselves will be Netanyahu’s real challenge, when he will be required to make decisions regarding core issues.

Netanyahu’s big achievement of the past few months has been his ability to re-direct American pressure: After more than a year of President Barack Obama leveraging heavy pressure on Netanyahu, the U.S. president has begun to apply pressure on Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to submit to direct peace talks.

With the help of this pressure from Obama, who has been desperate to achieve a diplomatic victory in the Middle East, Netanyahu got his wish – an American declaration of direct talks with no preconditions. This declaration, as announced by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, put an end to the Palestinian demand that negotiations be conducted on the condition that a Palestinian state would be established with 1967 borders.

Senior officials in Jerusalem said Netanyahu had clarified to the Americans that his demand for negotiations without preconditions wasn’t only a political stance; it was also a political necessity that would enable him to keep his coalition government intact. Netanyahu had previously agreed with his partners on the right – Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, as well as Minister Benny Begin and Vice Prime Minister Moshe Ya’alon – that negotiations would restart with no preconditions. Netanyahu even reiterated this stance in the decision from the forum of seven senior cabinet ministers earlier this week regarding the resumption of peace talks.

With the help of American pressure, Netanyahu also succeeded in rendering essentially meaningless the announcement Friday from the Quartet, which reaffirmed its support for the resolution of all final-status issues. The Palestinians had hoped the European Union, the UN and Russia would be able to hand them a victory by calling for a complete Israeli settlement freeze, but that also did not happen in the end.

The Americans vetoed that demand and clarified that such an announcement would back Netanyahu into a corner and torpedo the negotiations. In the end, the Quartet announcement turned into another international document that lacked bite.

Netanyahu agreed to compromise on one issue – the timetable for negotiations – which also gave the Palestinians something of an achievement. They had demanded a certain timetable in order to bridge their lack of trust regarding Netanyahu’s intentions for the peace process. The Israeli premier, who for a year and a half has been trying to prove to the international community that he is a partner for peace, himself recently told the Council on Foreign Relations in New York that he believes peace can be achieved within one year. As such, Netanyahu had no problem compromising on the timetable.

Netanyahu’s diplomatic victory, however, is a temporary one. U.S. envoy George Mitchell acquiesced to another of Netanyahu’s requests – that talks take place with no American mediator in the room – but the administration plans to be especially active in the process. If Mitchell sees that talks stagnating or foot-dragging on Netanyahu’s part, he won’t hesitate to put American proposals on the table.

In addition, after the celebratory ceremony in Washington, when the essential and Sisyphean talks begin, Netanyahu will be forced to present his first stances on such issues as borders for a future Palestinian state, the status of Jerusalem and the future of the settlements. Until now, no Likud prime minister has conducted peace talks to reach a final-status agreement with the Palestinian Authority and has, therefore, never been required to seriously deal with these issues. When this moment arrives, the internal differences of opinion, in all their might, and the tension with the American administration will bubble up to the surface and may even intensify. That moment will be Netanyahu’s true test.

Police: Soldiers looted flotilla ships: YNet

Ynet learns military police suspect officer, soldier sold laptop computers stolen from aid ships while they docked in Ashdod, after controversial IDF raid. Officials say investigation likely to prove ‘highly shameful’ for Israel
An officer and a soldier are suspected of selling goods they took from the highly controversial aid flotilla to Gaza, which was raided by the IDF on May 31, Ynet learned from the military police on Wednesday.

Investigators say they are currently trying to ascertain whether laptop computers were sold by a soldier to three other soldiers, and whether they were initially taken from the flotilla vessels by an officer.

A high-ranking officer familiar with the case said the suspicions are highly likely to prove true. “The investigation has just begun, but as it appears now it will prove embarrassing and shameful,” another official said. “These are soldiers who don’t understand what their uniform represents.”

The investigation could prove extremely harmful to Israel as the state strives to fend off global criticism for the raid, which resulted in the deaths of nine Turkish citizens. Recently the Turkel committee, which is investigating the raid on behalf of the state, has called various leaders to testify before it, and a UN committee is not far behind.

The soldier suspected of selling the computers was arrested late Monday night, along with three soldiers suspected of buying them. In the process police say they discovered additional stolen goods in the soldier’s possession, including more laptop computers and cellular phones.

Later an officer was arrested on suspicion he sold the goods to the soldier. The officer, a second-lieutenant in rank, is a commander of an army unit who had access to the ships while they docked at Ashdod port, awaiting their return to Turkey.

Police say the officer stole 4-6 laptops from the ship and then sold them to the soldier, who in turn sold them to three other soldiers two months ago. The three have already admitted to making the purchases during questioning, and the computers were confiscated by police. They were found to be brand new, and not meant for sale in Israel.

They also told interrogators that the soldier who sold them the goods told them they had been stolen from the flotilla ships, yet they did not pass the information on to their commanders.

Activists complained of theft
The soldier and officer have yet to appear before the court for a hearing on the remand of their arrests. Police say other soldiers are yet to be arrested, but refuse to give further details.

Meanwhile investigators are intent on discovering where exactly the goods came from, and whether they were stolen from flotilla passengers. One investigator said that if indeed the goods were found to belong to activists on board, they would be recompensed.

The IDF Spokesperson’s Office confirmed reports of an investigation Wednesday, but said that it was “not at all certain the equipment was taken from the flotilla”.

Complaints by flotilla passengers about stolen equipment surfaced not long after the raid. Activists told the British Guardian in June that credit cards confiscated by the IDF had been used.

The Guardian reported that soldiers had used the cards to purchase various items, including iPod accessories. Claims regarding calls made from confiscated cell phones followed.

The IDF responded to the claims by stating that all of the personal effects brought by the activists to Israel had been placed aboard planes that transported them from the country, but that audio and video cassettes had been confiscated for security reasons.

EDITOR: It will never work…

Didn’t they always tell kids in Israel: “Arabs only understand force!”; so this new approach is bound to fail – there not enough Israeli Jews who could either understand or practice it.

IDF trying something new in West Bank: politeness: Haaretz

Most Arabic expressions soldiers learn are designed to order civilians to stop, open the door, identify themselves and present ID papers.
Generations of Israel Defense Forces soldiers have learned a limited lexicon of Arabic expressions while working West Bank checkpoints, patrols, arrests and searches of Palestinian homes. The expressions are designed to order civilians to stop, open the door, identify themselves and present identification papers.

For most troops, these are the only words of spoken Arabic that they knew. For Palestinians, this was the soundtrack to the occupation.
Last month, a company of Armored Corps reservists decided they would try to adjust the tone. The troops of Company 11 of the 7001 Battalion agreed that their central mission – safeguarding the checkpoint that lies on the key road linking Samaria with the Jordan Valley – would be carried out while using a different kind of language in their daily encounters with hundreds of Palestinians.

“I wanted to see if it was possible to see Palestinians as human beings and not as potential threats who suddenly take out knives or pipe bombs,” said Eliezer Cohen, a poet and social worker who initiated the idea. “This is antithetical to the entire viewpoint on which we were educated in the army.”

As someone who deals with words, Cohen and the other soldiers reworked the expressions used by troops at checkpoints.

“In the beginning, instead of starting the sentence with ‘Wakef’ (stop), we said ‘Sabah al-heir’ (good morning ). This changed their reaction almost immediately,” Cohen said.

“Instead of saying ‘gib al awiya,’ ordering them to show ID, we said ‘min fadlakum’ (please ), with an emphasis on the request,” he said. “But it wasn’t just the words. We decided that we would look everyone in the eye and that we would not aim our gun at anyone. This is out of the assumption that the overwhelming majority of people are interested in quiet and going to work.”