Month: August 2011

August 15, 2011

EDITOR: The Tent protesters of Israel suffer from a black spot…

The tent cities in Israel are growing everywhere, and the tremor they have forced in the political system may endure, and may, in the end, be the end of Netanyahu. However, it is quite clear that the protest is held within the Jewish-Israeli national consensus. There is not a single word about the occupation and its iniquities, and hardly a word about the Palestinians, either within Israel or beyond its non-existing borders.

But much worse is the reaction to the protest by the political elite. AS most of the anger in the streets is about the lack of cheap social housing, the Israeli leadership saw its chance to score an important goal, and riding the wave of protests, they announced huge amounts of new flat building in – yes, you worked it out – in Palestine! So more building in the OPT, in East and South Jerusalem, ONLY on Palestine stolen land.

From the tents of protest there was no real reaction to this disgusting move, and none is likely either – as they see them selves not only as part of the consensus, but more accurately, as the consensus itself, the leaders of the movement are oblivious to this cynical move and continue with their agenda of not looking where they prefer no to see. The potential for an important political move towards Palestine by this new movement died before it could be born.

The US is of course “deeply concerned”, as it always is when Israel continues to build illegally. This concern is so seep, that to sate, not a single pressure has been put on Israel to stop this building. Instead, the US supplies Israel with funds which enable it. Deep concern indeed!

Israel approves 227 new homes in West Bank settlement of Ariel: Haaretz

Defense Minister Ehud Barak okays largest housing project in single settlement since establishment of the Netanyahu government.

Defense Minister Ehud Barak has approved the building of 277 apartments the West Bank settlement of Ariel, defying U.S. criticism of continued settlement construction.

Barak authorized the construction in Ariel, the core of the settlement bloc deepest inside the West Bank. One hundred of the apartments will house Israelis evacuated in 2005 from a Gaza Strip settlement.

The new housing units are set to be built in Ariel’s Noyman neighborhood. 100 homes are intended for evacuees of the Gaza settlement of Netzarim, while the rest of the housing units are set to be sold freely.

The building permits for the homes were handed out a while ago, but marketing the lands to contractors was delayed due to diplomatic considerations until now. The construction is expected to conclude in about three years.

This marks the largest construction project in a single settlement since the establishment of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government.

A spokesman for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had no immediate comment Monday on the diplomatically charged move.

Since the establishment of Netanyahu’s government, very few building permits were handed out. In 2009, 492 housing units were approved in various West Bank settlements. In March of 2011, following the murder of a family in the settlement of Itamar, Netanyahu announced his intention to construct 500 homes in the area, but the land has yet to be marketed to contractors.

In recent weeks, Israel has also moved ahead on two other construction projects in east Jerusalem, the Palestinians’ hoped-for capital. The U.S. was critical of those plans.

Report: US threatens to halt humanitarian aid to Gaza: IOA

12 AUGUST 2011
State Department announcement comes in light of Hamas demands to audit the books of US charities, New York Times reports, which would violate U.S. policy against direct contacts with Hamas.

The United States threatened Thursday to halt humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip, after Hamas demanded to audit the books of U.S.-financed NGOs in Gaza, the New York Times reported.

According to the report, the U.S. State Department said it would stop delivering to Gaza some $100 million in aid for health care, agriculture, and water infrastructure if Hamas does not stop insisting on auditing the books of U.S. charities in the Gaza Strip.

The threat comes after Hamas officials took over the offices of the International Medical Corps on Sunday after the NGO refused to be audited by Hamas.

Hamas has been trying to tighten their grip on the NGOs in Gaza, first demanding they register with the central government, pay a fee and submit financial reports, the New York Times reported, but when they demanded in June that the groups must allow officials to audit their books, the charities began objecting.

Moreover, the report said that while Hamas did not explain the reason for its demand to audit the charities’ books, there are fears that money could be diverted for political or intelligence-gathering purposes.

The United States forbids American organizations from having direct contact with Hamas, who it labels as a terrorist group, and therefore on-site audits by Hamas officials would lead to the suspension of aid, the NYT quoted the U.S. State Department as saying.

U.S. ‘deeply concerned’ by Israel’s approval of East Jerusalem construction plans: Haaretz

Foreign Ministry source: U.S. Embassy in Israel contacted Prime Minister’s Bureau, Foreign Ministry to stress the seriousness of the American concern regarding the negative implications of the decision.

The United States said Tuesday it is “deeply concerned” by Israel’s approval of new housing in East Jerusalem. In its condemnation of Israel’s action, the U.S. is joining the EU, the UN, Russia and Turkey, who made similar statements in recent days.

A Foreign Ministry source in Jerusalem said that the U.S. Embassy in Israel contacted the Prime Minister’s Bureau and the Foreign Ministry and stressed the seriousness of the American concern regarding the negative implications of the decision, which may make it impossible to block unilateral Palestinian efforts for recognition of statehood at the United Nations in September.

The State Department said in a statement that such “unilateral actions work against efforts to resume direct negotiations and contradict the logic of a reasonable and necessary agreement between the parties.”

The State Department also said it raised its objections with the Israeli government.

Alongside its rare rebuke of a close ally, Washington said Israelis and Palestinians should settle their differences on Jerusalem through negotiation, adding that the United States “will continue to press ahead with the parties to resolve the core issues in the context of a peace agreement.”

Before Tuesday’s statement, the U.S. had been mostly silent on East Jerusalem construction over the last few months, which had seemingly become peripheral to U.S. concerns. The subject had been nearly completely absent from talks between the White House and the Prime Minister’s Bureau.

Interior Minister Eli Yishai approved the construction of more than 900 housing units in Har Homa last Thursday, confirming a plan that was approved two years ago by the District Planning Committee, and only now is in the process being finalized.

The decision will free the Housing and Construction Ministry to begin marketing land to developers for construction.

Four days earlier, EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton condemned Israel’s approval of the new housing units.

“The European Union has repeatedly urged the government of Israel to immediately end all settlement activities in the West Bank, including in East Jerusalem. All settlement activities are illegal under international law,” Ashton was quoted as saying in a statement.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s forum of eight ministers will meet Wednesday to discuss political assessments on the UN vote for recognition of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders in September. Netanyahu has stepped up the rate at which deliberations are held and they are expected to continue at least once a week until September.

During the discussions, Israeli responses will be considered as well as the possibility that there may be a violent confrontation in the West Bank the day after the UN vote.

This follows a statement by Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman Sunday charging that the Palestinian Authority is planning “unprecedented bloodletting” for September and claimed that he will demand from the Netanyahu and forum that Israel should cut off all contacts with the Palestinians, including security coordination.

For their part, other ministers in the senior forum, including Vice Premier Moshe Ya’alon, believe that the Palestinians have no intention of violence following the UN vote.

Israel’s social protesters mustn’t forget the occupation: Haaretz

The highly polarized sentiments contained in this word turn the occupation into an invaluable electoral asset.
By Alon Idan
Why does the protest movement ban the word “occupation”? Because using that word would dramatically reduce the number of protesters; it would stir disagreement and splinter the movement. Such factionalism would turn the protest into a “political” entity and expunge its populist character.

So we have to ask questions about the occupation’s other function, the one that complements “security needs” and “ideological fulfillment.” It appears that the “no” implies a “yes” – that is, if it is forbidden to say “occupation” to avoid dividing the public into factions and disuniting the protest movement, it follows that the occupation’s role is to divide the public and eliminate all possibility of protest against it.

The occupation is the means by which division and factionalism gain strength and preserve political power. The automatic way the public splits the moment the word is mentioned lets the heads of one of the two camps perpetuate their power with relative ease. After one faction gains the ability to forge a government, it gathers together sectors with narrow partisan interests and sends its leader to serve as prime minister. The occupation enables the government to have its way with matters that have nothing to do with events in the territories; any complaint about socioeconomic matters that might turn into a popular protest, as in the current case, threatens to fade away when it confronts the word that can’t be said.

The highly polarized sentiments contained in this word turn the occupation into an invaluable electoral asset. The use of appropriate ideological and biblical trappings conjure up a historical-ideological ambience; this transforms the occupation into a political asset that can never be forfeited, even if conceding it would improve the lives of the people who suffer under it. A built-in conflict of interests has been created between the government’s interest in perpetuating it and the humanitarian arguments seeking its end.

It’s no accident that the outlines of extreme capitalism, a policy based on the continual splintering of society due to competition among people, is inherent within the occupation. Anyone who travels around the West Bank and the Jordan Valley can witness capitalism’s geographic manifestations. Cantonization, the proliferation of checkpoints and the bureaucratic control of traffic are all components of separation designed to make survival difficult and perpetuate control by the central authority.

Also, the “free market,” one of the main topics addressed by the protest movement, is linked to the process of division and splintering. Alongside the chaos inherent in the concept “market,” there is the ironic use of the word “free” – the worker is forced to compete against his peers at any given moment knowing that the victory of one means the defeat of the other. Can the term “free” really be applied to principles that advocate constant competition and struggle for survival between individuals?

During his first term, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu used phrases that exposed his tendency to divide parts of the population to bolster his authority. (“Leftists have forgotten what it means to be Jews,” “They are afraid,” and so on ). Since then, he has learned an important Machiavellian lesson: Do what you think, but say whatever the public wants to hear. This has made his current term far more destructive. Instead of whispering words of disunity and polarization into the ears of Shas’ aged religious leaders, he has, with the help of people such as MKs David Rotem and Zeev Elkin, devoted himself to acts that divide the population.

The current protests stem from feelings of isolation that are based on the splintering of Israeli society. The occupation, the symbol of that disunity, is not mentioned in the tent camps because it threatens to eclipse the protest. This ongoing paradox spells its ultimate demise.

Continue reading August 15, 2011

August 9, 2011

EDITOR: War Zone in London

While other countries’ populations are involved in poliutical protest against tyrants and anti-social leaders bringing about wide devastation, the youth of Britain seems to be involved in something rather differnt…

Living in Haringay, and working in East London, I have to contend with the new realities, like most of us Londoners. The piece below has nothing to do with Gaza, has it? Well, maybe it has a little to do with Gaza – the streets of London, in parts, now resemble Gaza more than they resemble the rest of Europe.

[/caption]

London is Burning

By Haim Bresheeth

Yes, London is burning. Again. How utterly surprising and unbelievable. Of course, we are told, it is nothing like the 1980s. Nothing whatsoever to do with it. You watch the news and are told that there are different stories unfolding: Capitalism is choking itself (and us, in the process) to a painful death, not in one country, but across the globe. The future, so to speak, is behind us. There is nothing to look forward to but sweat and tears, and richer bankers than ever.

Then, in a total disconnect, we see the sights of chaos and destruction on the streets of London – feral youth on the rampage, harming what they find, destroying their ‘communities’, setting fire to shops and homes, attacking the police. Of course, there is no connection between the stories. No connection to a society where democracy has become meaningless, where elections cannot change the situation of most people, where the feral elite rules supreme, with their millions, billions and zillions – where their greed is the only force now moving society.

David Cameron has spoken of ‘broken Britain’. It is here and now – he has managed to break it within one year, like Mrs. Thatcher before him; Ina short while it became quite clear to young people that there is nothing to look forward to, at the same time that they are exposed to the shenanigans of the feral elite, the corrupt connections between the politicians in power, the media barons, the police and the financiers – a concoction of lethal power ruling our broken Britain. The enormous greed which is the organizing principle of this society, has now seemingly percolated down to the lower social echelons – the youth breaking into a phone shop to get an iPhone, to get new trainers, and to light a few fires on the way, like their elders in the banking community, which have left a world of burnt earth behind them.

No. There is no connection whatsoever. The Middle Class cannot face its image in the broken media mirror of the fires, the looting, the chaos and thieving, the breakdown of the order of things. And yet, it is them who have brought this about, by supporting the same politics which have destroyed British society a number of times before. It is the society which supports military takeover of other countries, of inflicting untold violence on their societies in Iraq and Afghanistan, of supporting the elites who, while preaching for the rest of us to have a ‘haircut’, are piling enormous loot in tax havens.

The morality of the ruling elite has won, it seems, and the young people have understood – you don’t get anything for the asking – this capitalism is feral and inhumane, and if you wish to get anything, you must take it. Greed has been seen as good by the New Labour politicians who spent their time with its worst proponents, so we can hardly be surprised at Tories sharing their liking of greed. But now, greed has come a full circle.  We can all see the end scene, with the fires burning quietly through the sultry nights of the Summer of Fear. London has turned into a warzone, people have lost their homes and businesses, and, would you believe it, the PM of broken Britain was forced to end his holiday early!  What is the world coming to? What next?

Tomorrow, as the TV crews will film the glowing embers of this night’s fires, and the news of the collapse of more firms, of more cuts, of less jobs, of the world economy tumbling – we will be told all this is simply the results of one man being shot by the police. Yes, like the Arab Spring was started by one man burning himself in Tunis, like the Intifada in Palestine having started by the IDF killing a girl in a road accident…

What lights the fuse is of course immaterial. What is important is the fact that there is a bomb, there is fuse, and there is the desperate will to light it. If not one event, it will be another. The bomb is there now, being put there by the Greedy Class, by feral elites, by ‘muscular democrats’ like Mr. Cameron, the author and creator of Broken Britain. All the King’s horses and all the king’s men may fail to put Old Blighty together again.

EDITOR: THE BDS campaign continues to change realities!

hWith French company Veolia in mortal trouble, with more and more companies refusing to work in and with Israel, the Lush story is typical.

Lush: Saudia Arabia gets under our skin: The Jewish Chronicle

July 28, 2011
“It’s not just their exfoliant that makes my face go red!”
Skincare company Lush says concerns about the lack of a “mixed” workforce would prevent it opening a store in Israel – but it operates stores in Saudi Arabia.
And this week the company, which has just opened a new store in Brent Cross, north-west London, defended its decision to promote a pro-Palestinian song on its website.
Customers have been challenging staff in the Lush store in Brent Cross, about the company’s support for Oneworld’s single “Freedom for Palestine”. The head office has received 223 emails to date on the issue.
On the Lush website, under “Our Ethical Campaigns” it says: “The catastrophe facing the Palestinian people is one of the defining global justice issues of our time.”
Hilary Jones, the company’s ethics director, admitted that Lush had been approached by the charity War on Want about putting the single online, but said it had not donated to the cause.
She said: “It was an easy decision. We trade with the region and forge links on both sides of the community. We buy olive oil from a Jewish-Arab project.
“But we don’t feel it’s a safe environment to have a store. Would we want a shop where we couldn’t have a mix? We have a multicultural attitude to everything we do; we want everyone in the country where we are trading to be on an equal footing as far as basic human rights go. Some of the team would have to come through checkpoints and be treated differently on their way to work – that would be our worry.”
Simon Emmerson, a Jewish musician who produces the soundtracks for Lush stores, said: “We are taking sides, definitely. The money isn’t going to support Hamas, it’s an issue of human rights. We’ve had long and very heated discussions about this. If people feel let down, we have to argue our corner. Other companies see these ethical campaigns as a PR exercise.”
The Zionist Federation said it urged supporters of Israel to write to the store, and StandWithUs UK said it was “deeply disturbed” and was encouraging a boycott of Lush products and a letter-writing campaign. The ZF’s director of public affairs, Stefan Kerner, said: “Refusing to open a store in Israel, whilst having stores in Saudi Arabia, just proves how blatantly biased the company are – and how they are more concerned with bashing Israel than staying true to their own ethical standards.”
The English Defence League’s Jewish Division advertised a protest outside the store last Sunday on its Facebook page, but staff said no organised group had appeared.
A member of staff at the Brent Cross store, which has been open for three weeks, said: “We have been worried about some demonstrations, but we support people’s right to demonstrate and we would not ask Brent Cross to move people on if they came to protest. We have had a lot of people come into the shop and talk to us about it: some have been angry.”
English teacher Judi Granit said she would no longer buy from the company, despite often having products shipped to her home in Haifa. She said: “I am absolutely broken-hearted. I have relished and supported the wonderful products for years. I am 100 per cent for supporting human rights around the globe and ending suffering, however, I do not condone untruths and lies, even if the intentions are good.
“I invite them to visit Israel and see that there is no apartheid here and no religious segregation. Yet the song ‘Freedom for Palestine'” says the opposite.”

Reut Institute: Israeli Boycott law may backfire: The Electronic Intifada

Adri Nieuwhof on Tue, 08/09/2011
In response to the growing Boycott Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, the Israeli parliament passed an anti-boycott law on 11 July. The law is heavily criticized; for example, Amnesty International denounced the anti-boycott law because it “will have a chilling effect on freedom of expression in Israel.”

Palestinian member of the Israeli parliament, Ahmad Tibi, criticized the law as “a strike against free speech.” in an article. He pledged his support to the BDS movement:

“Because I believe in ending the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory, equal rights for Palestinians and Jews, and the right of return for Palestinian refugees forced from their homes and lands in 1948, I support boycotting — and calling on others to boycott — all Israeli companies that help perpetuate these injustices.”

A few days later, a remarkable warning was published by the Reut Institute, which characterizes itself as “a non-partisan Zionist organization” in a promotional video. Reut mentions in the video its support for strategic decision making processes of the State of Israel which includes advising the Prime Minister’s office, the Ministry of Defense, the Israeli army and the National Security Council..

Reut’s CEO, Roy Keidar and head of Reut’s National Security Team, Eran Shayson, warned on 2 August, that “the greater damage of the boycott law is the controversy forming around it.” They write:

“Indeed, the urgent sense that action must be taken against the de-legitimization phenomenon is both understandable and justified. However, assumptions that the boycott law and other similar laws provide the answer to this challenge, are wrong and may well backfire.”

Fighting ‘delegitmization’

In February 2010, Reut qualified the actions of the BDS movement as delegitimization of Israel in a report on the urgency to respond to the growing international criticism of Israel’s violations of international law and disrespect of the rights of the Palestinian people. Reut referred in the report to critical voices as “delegitimizers”.

“The effectiveness of Israel’s delegitimizers, who represent a relatively marginal political and societal force in Europe and North America, stems from their ability to engage and mobilize others by blurring the lines with Israel’s critics. They do so by branding Israel as a pariah and ‘apartheid’ state; rallying coalitions around ‘outstanding issues’ such as the ‘Gaza blockade’; making pro-Palestinian activity trendy; and promoting grassroots activities such as boycotts, divestments, and sanctions (BDS) as a way to ‘correct Israel’s ways.’”

In addition, Reut wrote:

“The Delegitimization Network aims to supersede the Zionist model with a state that is based on the ‘one person, one vote’ principle by turning Israel into a pariah state and by challenging the moral legitimacy of its authorities and existence.”

Comparison with South Africa

When I interviewed Professor John Dugard, former UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories in October 2010, I asked him to react to accusations that the BDS movement delegitimizes Israel. He said:

“The BDS actions are delegitimizing Israel. There is no question about that. Obviously Israel is unwilling to accept that, similar to apartheid South Africa, which did want to suppress international sanctions. BDS was at that time effective, largely as a result of international advocacy for [boycott, divestment and] sanctions. It delegitimized the state and ultimately led to change in South Africa.

The comparison between Israel and South Africa is important. The situation is very similar at present. The international community is increasingly critical of Israel, advocating for international [boycott, divestment and] sanctions. It is not surprising that Israel is taking steps to prevent them in the same way the South African government did.”

In February 2010, Reut’s policy advice to Israel was to effectively face the “Delegitimization Network” by embracing a network-based logic and response by “Focusing on the hubs of delegitimization – such as London, Paris, Toronto, Madrid, and the Bay Area – and on undermining its catalysts.” Reut called on the Israeli government to direct substantial resources towards this end.

Attacking the messenger

Reut’s advice to “undermine the catalysts” of the BDS movement is a perfect example of attacking the messenger. A few months after Reut’s advice, The Electronic Intifada and its Dutch donor were fiercely attacked by the NGO Monitor. Ali Abunimah analyzed the reasons behind the attack in his article “Why NGO Monitor is attacking The Electronic Intifada”.

He wrote:

“NGO Monitor’s attack on The Electronic Intifada is part of a well-financed, Israeli-government endorsed effort to silence reporting about and criticism of Israel by attacking so-called “delegitimizers” — those who speak about well-documented human rights abuses, support boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS), or promote full equality for Palestinians. Last February, The Electronic Intifada reported that a leading Israeli think-tank had recommended a campaign of “sabotage” against Israel’s critics as a matter of state policy.”

In its criticism of the boycott law, Reut writes that the law applies to Israel while the “delegitimization campaign is global, primarily operating beyond Israel’s borders.” Therefore the law cannot stop the global BDS movement. In addition, Reut identifies the controversy forming around the boycott law as a danger, creating divisions in “the Israeli camp” at a time where unity is needed.

Indeed, the Israeli boycott law is an attack on freedom of expression, and as such another example of Israel’s disrespect for basic human rights. It would have been very disturbing if this law was docilely accepted.

August 7, 2011

EDITOR: Israeli social protest spreads, but what can it lead to?

As the tent cities grow in Israel, so it seems does the confusion.After all, isn’t Israel an economic miracle, with a growth rate of 4.5% at the time many countries are facing frozen economies? So, if all is so well, why is it is bad, as the protest movement clearly proves?

Israel, one of the smallest countries on earth (though we have no idea how small, as its boundaries have never been agreed, and they keep changing…) is also the world’s FOURTH arms dealer. Are you a fan of arms dealing? I hope not. Israel is making its wealth from death and destruction, not just in the middle east.

Many observers of Israel’s economics also seem to overlook the many decades of US support for Israel – both the highest per capita, and also the highest over the last four decades. Why is the US supporting one of the world’s richest countries, when it faces problems itself? Ask yourself that.

Bearing mind it is such a rich country, the current unrest proves clearly that this wealth is going only to the 18 richest families in Israel, and that the rest of the population is getting poorer. Do you also support this?

Last but not least – Israel is controlling some six million Palestinians, all living under its military control, but more importantly, its economic control. This occupied population is forced to be the captive market of Israeli goods, and is the basis of its economic growth. Is this NOT a war economy?

The many hundreds of thousands in Israel who are in the streets and tent cities, have not, to date, combined their protest with a deeper protest – against the occupation and its iniquities. This may well be because they are benefiting, or think they may be benefiting, from the occupation and the war economy producing the mass of armaments on sale. Read Abir Kopti below to fully realise what this protest means for Palestinians.

As long as this is their outlook, they will remain insignificant, and their protest will not be really universal, and will not turn into political change.

IDF soldiers are also protesting... by Carlo Latuff

 

stars and bombs: In Gaza

Aug 5 2011
We are watching the sky, sleeping on the roof to escape the heat. I flatter the clouds’ beauty and am watching sporadic shooting stars when the first F-16 appeared from the direction of the sea. No sound, just a blinking red light quite high up.  Three more follow. Their roar slowly becomes audible and they drop a couple of flares.

We trace their path, above us, chilling.  The roar is normal, F-16s are normal, and reading in the news the next day that some part of Gaza was bombed is normal. They continue eastward and a bombing seems imminent.  It is. A thick cloud of black smoke blots the dim lights of houses in eastern Deir al Balah where the F-16s have struck.

Their roar doesn’t disappear yet.

They’re bombing Khan Younis, Emad says matter of factly. Not a hard guess, what else are they doing up there are nearly 2 am.

He keeps working on his laptop and I keep sleepily tracing the sky, watching this time for their re-appearance not for shooting stars.

After a few minutes of re-contemplating the sky, we know precisely where they’ve gone.

Two massive blasts, the house shakes. They’ve bombed somewhere near the sea, which is only a few hundred metres away.  I remember the shakes of the Ezbet Abed Rabbo house Leila and I were in when F-16s were flattening the area during the Israeli war on Gaza in 2008-2009.  One directly behind that house, the walls ready to cave in; one across the lane some 30 metres away, leaving a massive crater.

The night sky is orange again, gone are the stars and romance.

He is hugging me, pushing my head down to the ground, protecting from any flying debris. Pointlessly he tries to protect me, but when the blasts are on you no amount of hugging and ducking will do.

A bit of confusion… to stay rooftop or run down to the ground. I remember when the Sharouk building with various media outlets was repeatedly hit by smaller missiles, not the one-ton F-16 crater-makers.  The building danced and it felt like the stairs had turned into one long slide, to take us from the 9th or 10th floor down light speed.

The drive to see what happens next is strong, leaving us not wanting to abandon the roof.  We stay, and soon his brothers appear to see where the blasts have hit. We go down to check on his parents, thankfully asleep, hard of hearingness a relief this time. We go back up and the orange has gone, its grey and starless now.

“It’s raining” says Emad.  I’m confused, think he means the bombing triggered some weather reaction.  Concrete dust flutters down upon us, the dry kind of rain. The ambulance sirens wail, the Red Crescent or Ministry of Health ambulances will be racing for the site.  If they are late, the dead and injured will be piled into any car near the explosion that still moves.  There is a sustained honking in Gaza that everyone recognizes as make way, we’ve got another victim here.

Now 3 of his brothers are rooftop with us and going over the blasts.  For a Strip that has seen so many Israeli terror bombings over the years, this latest –comparatively far away at a few hundred metres –has hit a nerve even with these men putting on bravado. They are brave, of course, and endure psychological war in addition to actual blasts.  Every time one of those fucking F-16s flies over us, it’s a reminder of the last war, or of previous attacks, or of random bombings, or of friends and family martyred in their sleep, cars, homes…

Everytime those F-16s intentionally break the sound barrier to create a bomb-like sonic boom, everyone within range instinctively remembers their own personal horror at whichever Israeli war or attacks.

His brothers are talking about their children, how one child clinched up into a ball in his sleep, how hard is for all the children.  But their rapid banter betrays them: its hard for them as well.

In true Palestinian style they mask any fear they might be feeling—as any human should be feeling in these circumstances –with jokes and teasing.

Were you scared? they tease me.  Yes and no.  Once again numb from the fear, as I was during the 23 days of Israeli bombing Gaza in winter 2008-2009, but that horror of what comes next always exists.  How many martyrs will there be? Inshallah none.  Is this the start of the next Israeli slaughter of locked-in Palestinians or will that come tomorrow? What the hell will I do when I am not here… not like I can stop any of this, not like I can protect them any more than Emad’s loving attempt. How can I possibly ever leave here, when that next massacre is always looming from those Israeli war machines above and around us?

The Zionist news tomorrow will blather on about a strategic strike against terror.  But rearrange their scripted words and you get the truth: it is a strategic terror against Palestinians, as always, and involved living, breathing, dreaming, working human beings below those terrorizing F-16s, breathing the dust of another bombed building.

2:30 am

Emad and I are sleeping, not sleeping but lying down, inside this time, not that that makes any difference.  I’m thinking shit,shit,shit, how can I ever leave him and his family and my friends and everyone here? We’re both lost in our own heads, thinking about the blast.

Blast. Another one.  It’s louder inside, because of the echo.  Thankfully the windows are open; blasts like that shatter windows; we’d have a glass shard rain upon us this time.

His younger brother is coming back from work at his grocery shop, laden with yogurt and hummus for “suhoor”, the morning meal before fasting begins anew. His ears are ringing from the nearness of the bomb but he hides whatever anxiety he surely haswith grins and chatter.

They re-play the same jokes made on the roof earlier. It’s for Ramadan, they’re giving us fire-works, they’re making a party.  They’re helping us wake up (we slept through suhoor yesterday, not even hearing the mild beating of the street drummers who circle waking people up for a meal and prayer).

Emad’s father is unplussed. He doesn’t feign bravado or joke, just sits a little sleepily and looks at his paper with the prayer times written down. He goes to the nearest mosque five times a day, including the early morning prayer. He’s lived a long, hard life, expelled from his farm land and village which is now buried under some Israeli name, reared a family in one of Palestine’s many, many, impossibly overcrowded refugee camps where families slept in tents for years until they improved to stifling concrete block homes with entire families in one single, dank room. He’s worked to educate his many, many sons and daughters. He’s lived through all the Zionist hell Israel dishes out, from his expulsion to the occupation and horrors that go with that to the sporadic bombings to the full-out invasions. He’s lost a son to cancer that couldn’t be treated properly because he couldn’t access the needed medical care outside of Gaza.

So when all of us are gibbering or teasing or mulling the last bomb blast, he is off somewhere in his head but his expression doesn’t betray it.  And I think he’s only really concerned about being on time for the next prayer. A life of repeated drama is enough to render bomb blasts somewhat insignificant.

It’s the same target as half hour ago, but this time surely there are casualties, people who waited some minutes before going to see the damage.  Israel, of course, knows this.  During the last war on Gaza, first Israeli bombings would be followed just one or two minutes later, sometimes 5 minutes, by another bomb in the same place. Family and friends who’d come to help rescue bomb victims would themselves be torn apart by the second and third blasts. A technique guaranteed to get the bystander civilians who come to rescue, if not the medics.

We return to sleep, wary.

Jewish sharia: Haaretz

‘The National Home of the Jewish People’ bill presumes to represent Diaspora Jews; they will have to decide whether they want to continue living abroad in a democratic country that lets them practice their faith as they wish, or in a Jewish state that robs the foundations of democracy from them.
By Zvi Bar’el
The superfluous mask has finally been torn off. A Jewish state and a democratic state cannot exist under the same roof. One contradicts the other. In his explanations for the bill that he initiated with Kadima’s Avi Dichter and Yisrael Beiteinu’s David Rotem – this marvelous combination should be etched well in our memories – Likud’s Zeev Elkin said that “the law is designed to give the courts reasoning that supports the state as the Jewish nation-state when ruling in situations in which the state’s Jewish character clashes with the principles of democracy.”

There was no need to wait for Elkin’s explanations or to be angry about the support of the 20 MKs from that strange party, Kadima, which behaves like a car in which not only the headlights don’t work, neither do the hazards. The Jewish sharia bill, which the MKs introduced furtively before fleeing for their long recess, will only make the existing situation official. It will make clear to any Jew in the world that a blend of democracy and Judaism is only possible in the Diaspora.

To “be a Jew in your tent and a man in the street,” as in the poem by Yehuda Leib Gordon – which became the slogan of the Haskala, the Jewish Enlightenment – is possible only for an American, French or British Jew. In Jewish Israel, a Jew can be a Jew only – democracy will officially be defined as a luxury. It will be possible only in cases where religion permits it. And religion will permit it only when it does not contradict the word of God. Sovereignty is transferred from the citizen to the Holy One, blessed be He, and his interpreters on earth.

On the other hand, it’s hard to oppose a bill that puts the State of Israel so near the other countries in the region and creates a foundation of understanding among the nations based on granting religion a higher priority than the state and government. For example, the Egyptian constitution states that “the Islamic principles of law are the main source for legislation.” According to the Syrian constitution, “Muslim law is the source for legislation.”

Actually, it seems the Iranian constitution could serve as an excellent inspiration for the country’s commitment to promoting God as a main source of legislation. This constitution requires the country to create “the proper environment for the growth of ethical values based on faith, piety and a battle against corruption.” This “proper environment” imposes the will of religion on art, science, the media and of course education.

The Israeli bill is not as far-reaching. It does not demand that “Jewish art” be an exclusive subject for study and does not prohibit the teaching of science that contradicts faith. Although it revokes Arabic’s status as an official language, it still permits Arab citizens “the right to linguistic access to government services, as will be determined by law,” unlike Turkey’s approach to the Kurdish language. But there is no prohibition against passing a law that will prohibit this right as well.

The bill does not yet rule that Jewish law is the main source of authority for legislation, and for now makes do with the fact that Jewish law “will serve as a source of inspiration for the legislator.” And when there is no solution in legislation, case law or “a clear analogy,” the court will be required to decide according to the principles of “freedom, justice, integrity and peace in the Jewish heritage.”

What exactly are those principles? “An eye for an eye”? Or “a stranger shalt thou not wrong”? And what are the principles of peace in the Jewish heritage? Those of Rotem, Aryeh Eldad (National Union ) and Yulia Shamalov Berkovich (Kadima), or those of Nachman Shai (Kadima ), Benjamin Ben-Eliezer (Labor) and Meir Sheetrit (Kadima) – who are all signatories to the bill? Do “the principles of peace” permit territorial compromise or does the Promised Land, from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River, constitute the borders of the Jewish nation-state?

The bill, which is called “The National Home of the Jewish People,” presumes to represent Diaspora Jews as well. But from now on they will have to decide whether they want to continue living abroad in a democratic country that lets them practice their faith as they wish, or in a Jewish state that robs the foundations of democracy from them. This is usually a silent Jewish community that is tolerant of its country of refuge, a refuge that is gradually becoming crammed with garbage that is liable to keep away any liberal Jew.

Continue reading August 7, 2011