August 16, 2011

EDITOR: The unbelievable is here at last…

Who would believe that reason main rein Washington, in a difficult year for the Democratic President? A pleasant surprise, nonetheless, and it may also be a sign for some future moves against the massive support if Israel, one of the richest countries, by the US, one of the countries most affected by the crisis, with its massive budget problems, not to mention morality and political wisdom…

U.S. Senator seeks to cut aid to elite IDF units operating in West Bank and Gaza: Haaretz

Senator Patrick Leahy claims Shayetet 13 unit, undercover Duvdevan unit, and the Israel Air Force Shaldag unit are involved in human rights violations in occupied territories.

U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy is promoting a bill to suspend U.S. assistance to three elite Israel Defense Forces units, alleging they are involved in human rights violations in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Leahy, a Democrat and senior member of the U.S. Senate, wants assistance withheld from the Israel Navy’s Shayetet 13 unit, the undercover Duvdevan unit and the Israel Air Force’s Shaldag unit.

Defense Minister Ehud Barak, a long-time friend of Leahy’s, met with him in Washington two weeks ago to try to persuade him to withdraw the initiative.

According to a senior Israeli official in Jerusalem, Leahy began promoting the legislation in recent months after he was approached by voters in his home state of Vermont.

Should American politicians intervene in Israeli defense strategy? Visit Haaretz.com on Facebook and share your thoughts.

A few months ago, a group of pro-Palestinian protesters staged a rally across from Leahy’s office, demanding that he denounce the killing by Shayetet 13 commandos of nine Turkish activists who were part of the flotilla to Gaza last May.

Leahy, who heads the Senate Appropriations Committee’s sub-committee on foreign operations, was the principle sponsor of a 1997 bill prohibiting the United States from providing military assistance or funding to foreign military units suspected of human rights abuses or war crimes. The law also stipulates that the U.S. Defense Department screen foreign officers and soldiers who come to the United States for training for this purpose.

Leahy wants the new clause to become a part of the U.S. foreign assistance legislation for 2012, placing restrictions on military assistance to Israel, particularly to those three units.

Leahy says these units are responsible for harming innocent Palestinian civilians and that no system of investigation is in place to ensure that their members are not committing human rights violations. According to Leahy’s proposal, U.S. military assistance to Israel would be subject to the same restrictions that apply to countries such as Egypt, Pakistan and Jordan.

The senior Israeli official said that the Israeli Embassy in Washington had been trying unsuccessfully now for some months to persuade Leahy to back down from the initiative.

Two weeks ago, during Barak’s visit to Washington, Israel’s ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren, asked Barak to meet with Leahy to dissuade him from promoting the legislation.

Leahy, who is on the Democratic Party’s left flank, has for many years promoted human rights issues globally. He has been sharply critical of Israel in recent years, especially following Operation Cast Lead in late 2008.

However, he also signed Congressional resolutions supporting Israel’s right to self-defense.

Leahy, 71, has served in the Senate for 35 years. He was a personal friend of former Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and has known Ehud Barak since the latter was IDF chief of staff.

Barak, who met with Leahy privately, was quoted by the senior Israeli official as telling the senator: “The difference between Israel and terror groups or other countries in the Middle East is that we give an accounting and there is monitoring.”

Barak also said the IDF had a strict judiciary with broader powers than the judiciary in the United States armed forces.

Barak was also quoted as telling Leahy that the IDF military advocate general is not subservient to the military command, but rather to the attorney general, and has complete autonomy.

“If a Palestinian is injured, he can approach the High Court of Justice,” Barak said. “The investigations undergo judicial review that is independent of commanders. There are dozens of hearings every year that are based on Palestinians’ complaints against soldiers. They reach the highest and most independent authorities,” he said.

Leahy listened to Barak, but he did not say whether he would withdraw his initiative. According to the senior Israeli official, Israel does know whether Leahy has done so.

However, the official said Barak felt Leahy had understood his message, and that the Israeli Embassy in Washington was following the matter. If necessary, Barak and Leahy would hold another talk, the official added.

Leahy’s spokesman, David Carle, said the senator did not comment on his private conversations.

Israeli air strikes on Gaza after rocket hits Beersheba: BBC

Israel has carried out a series of air strikes on the Gaza Strip, after militants in the Hamas-run territory fired a rocket into southern Israel.

One Palestinian was killed and at least five others were wounded, Palestinian health officials said. Some of the pre-dawn strikes targeted an area east of Gaza City, they said.

The rocket had been fired from the Gaza Strip into the southern Israeli town of Beersheba.

No-one was hurt in that attack.

“We learned of the martyrdom of the youth Musa Shtawe, 29, who died of his injuries after a strike east of Gaza City,” Adham Abu Selmiya, spokesman for the Hamas-run emergency services in the Gaza Strip, is quoted as saying by the AFP news agency.

Recent weeks have seen an increase in mortar and rocket fire from Gaza after months of relative calm.

Further south, two more raids were carried out east of Khan Yunis and on a tunnel under the border with Egypt near Rafah, Palestinian sources said.

“The raid in Rafah left three people injured, including a child,” Mr Abu Selmiya said.

Continue reading August 16, 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

July 26, 2011

EDITOR: The Norwegian bomber has interesting inspiration

Below you can see that Melanie Philips has inspired the madman from Norway. Not that surprising. What is interesting is her claim that she is only mentioned 2 times in 1500 pages… really, he should have mentioned her more often… normally, I would think twice before quoting Phillips here, but this is too good to miss…

A wider pathology: Melanie Phillips blog

A concerned reader has sent me a post by Sunny Hundal on the Liberal Conspiracy blog.  Hundal brings us what he clearly considers to be the most important news about the Norwegian atrocity. This is that, in the ‘manifesto’ reportedly published by the terrorist suspect Anders Behring Breivik, two of my articles are quoted.

Golly. Is Hundal suggesting that my writing provoked the mass murder of some 93 Norwegians?  Doubtless with one eye on the law of libel, he piously avers:

…there is no suggestion that his actions were inspired by Melanie Phillips, nor am I making that claim.

Yet apart from a glancing reference to Jeremy Clarkson, whose remark about the flag of St George is also cited in this ‘manifesto’, I am the only person to whom Hundal refers to in this blog post, quoting at some length both my article and Breivik’s comments on it. He therefore gives the impression that I play a major role in this supposed ‘manifesto’, which he describes as warning of the ‘Islamic colonisation of western Europe’.

But in fact, there are only two references to me or my work in its 1500 pages. Those references are to two articles by me published in the Daily Mail, a mainstream British paper — one on mass fatherlessness in Britain, and the other on the revelation by a former civil servant of a covert Labour government policy of mass immigration into Britain. There is no reference whatever to my writing on Islamisation.

Not only that, Breivik name-checks a vast number of mainstream writers and thinkers, including Bernard Lewis, Roger Scruton, Ibn Warraq, Mark Steyn, Theodore Dalrymple, Daniel Hannan, Diana West, Lars Hedegaard, Frank Field, Nicolas Soames, Keith Windschuttle, Edmund Burke, John Locke, Thomas Jefferson, Friedrich Hayek, Winston Churchill, Mahatma Ghandi, George Orwell and many others; indeed, it’s a roll call of western thinking and beyond, past and present.

So why doesn’t Hundal refer to any of these people who have also been thus name-checked? Why has he singled me out in this way? It looks like yet another crude attempt to smear me by a writer who has long displayed an unhealthy obsession with my work (see here and here  and here for example).

The supposed beliefs of the Norway massacre’s perpetrator has got the left in general wetting itself in delirium at this apparently heaven-sent opportunity to take down those who fight for life, liberty and western civilisation against those who would destroy it. On Twitter and the net and in the liberal media, the forces of spite, malice and venom have been unleashed in a terrifying display of irrationality.

After all, we don’t even know yet whether Breivik acted alone. We don’t know whether this ‘manifesto’ was indeed written by him or indeed what it is: as Mark Steyn observes here, it reads like as weird kind of cut-and-paste job. If it is indeed the work of a psychopath, it doesn’t bear examination for a single minute.  And yet the words of a deranged individual are being cited by people like Hundal who are taking them entirely seriously. Since when did people ever use the ravings of a madman in public debate? As Steyn writes:

…when a Norwegian man is citing Locke and Burke as a prelude to gunning down dozens of Norwegian teenagers, he is lost in his own psychoses. Free societies can survive the occasional Breivik. If Norway responds to this as the left appears to wish, by shriveling even further the bounds of public discourse, freedom will have a tougher time.

Already, through the selective and distorted use of this document and the amplification of such malevolence through Twitter and the net, a blood-lust is building. Thus I am receiving emails such as one from Carsten T Holst-Lyngaard who says:

I congratulate you on your part in the Norway massacre;

or this from Taper Collins:

blood on your hands. hope you’re happy with the effects of your anti-everyone vitriol. abhorrent.

Breivik may be one unhinged psychopath – but what is now erupting as a result of the Norway atrocity is the frenzy of a western culture that has lost its mind.

Compare Phillips now to her writing after 7/7: Liberal Conspiracy

by Sunny Hundal
July 26, 2011 at 5:59 pm

You may have noticed that Melanie Phillips wrote a reply to my news piece earlier about how she was mentioned and quoted by the Oslo terrorist Breivik.

Phillips took time to go through Liberal Conspiracy to dredge up other times we had mentioned her, but didn’t even bother reading the front-page. She isn’t the only one I mentioned from the manifesto of course – we also pointed that the English Defence League was admired by him in internet postings.

I also pointed out that the manifesto frequently links to and mentions people such as Robert Spencer, another person that Phillips has quoted approvingly in the past. On Twitter I have pointed out links to several other groups such as the Hindu far-right in India.

Anyway. Yesterday, Melanie Phillips wrote on her blog:

After all, we don’t even know yet whether Breivik acted alone. We don’t know whether this ‘manifesto’ was indeed written by him or indeed what it is: as Mark Steyn observes here, it reads like as weird kind of cut-and-paste job. If it is indeed the work of a psychopath, it doesn’t bear examination for a single minute.

And yet the words of a deranged individual are being cited by people like Hundal who are taking them entirely seriously. Since when did people ever use the ravings of a madman in public debate?

Odd. Melanie Phillips wasn’t so afraid to ask questions and link the actions of a few ‘madmen’ (a term offensive to some) to Muslims straight after the terrorist attacks of 7/7.

Here is what she said then: (h-t Chris Brooke):

Above all, this poses the most urgent questions about the Muslim community from which this monstrous act has sprung. It is absolutely essential that we all find the answer to such questions if we are to have any hope at all of preventing further such atrocities.

In doing so, it has been taking its cue from the Muslim community itself which seems to be in the deepest denial. Yes, it has certainly condemned the atrocity in the strongest terms. But in the very next breath, its leaders have effectively washed their hands of it by repeating like a mantra that anyone claiming to be a Muslim who commits such an act is not a proper Muslim, because Islam is a religion of peace.

She also wasn’t averse to using that tragedy to attack the left broadly:

These lies emanating from extremists in the Muslim world have been further inflated by support from those in the wider community in Britain – mainly on the left – whose obsessive repetition of such falsehoods and disproportionate attention to the misdeeds of the west while ignoring Muslim atrocities have helped turn grievance into hysteria.

Breivik didn’t act alone – he had plenty of people agreeing with him on what the problem was and who was causing it.

Melanie Phillips’ response yesterday reminds me of this widely circulated poster on Facebook

Melanie Phillips ‘smeared’ over Breivik’s manifesto: Jewish Chronicle

By Jennifer Lipman, July 26, 2011
Journalist and commentator Melanie Phillips has criticised crude smear tactics after she was linked to the man behind the Norway massacre because he had quoted from her in his “manifesto”.
Ms Phillips, who writes a column for the Jewish Chronicle, responded to a post on the website Liberal Conspiracy, in which Sunny Hundal highlighted the fact that Anders Breivik had quoted from two separate pieces she had written for the Daily Mail.
Mr Hundal acknowledged that there was no suggestion that his actions, which led to the deaths of more than 90 people, were inspired by the writer.
But on her personal blog Ms Phillips said his post still gave that impression and pointed out that as she was one of many people quoted in Breivik’s 1,500 page missive – others included Winston Churchill, Mahatma Gandhi, Jeremy Clarkson and George Orwell – it was wrong to single her out.
“It looks like yet another crude attempt to smear me,” she said, adding that the political left was delighted by “this apparently heaven-sent opportunity to take down those who fight for life, liberty and western civilisation against those who would destroy it”.
She said of the manifesto: “If it is indeed the work of a psychopath, it doesn’t bear examination for a single minute.
“And yet the words of a deranged individual are being cited by people like Hundal who are taking them entirely seriously. Since when did people ever use the ravings of a madman in public debate?”
She also said that the “distortion” of her place in Breivik’s writings had prompted supporters of his actions to write and congratulate her.

Report: Norwegian Shooter Loves Israel: ICH

By Israel National News
July 25, 2011 “Israel National News” — Anders Behring Breivik, the man being held for Friday’s shooting at an island off the coast of Norway, expressed anti-Islamic sentiments in English in the past and was an enthusiastic supporter of Israel, according to a Sunday-evening report by Channel 2 television. Breivik’s 1,500 page book attacks the European political establishment because he sees it as an ally of the Muslims against Israel, and praises Israel for not giving Muslims the same rights they enjoy in different European countries.

Breivik says, “The time has come to stop the stupid support of the Palestinians…and to start supporting our cultural cousins – Israel.” The sight of the massacre was a camp which demanded, days earlier, that Israel “finish the occupation.” Anti-Israel, pro-Arab signs were hung in the camp. The death toll in the shooting and the explosion of a bomb in downtown Oslo stands at 93.

The grumpy diplomats of the rogue state: The Electronic Intifada

Ilan Pappe, 22 July 2011

The real reason for Israeli diplomats’ headaches. (Claudia Gabriela Marques Vieira / Flickr)

The Israeli ambassador to Spain, Raphael Schutz, has just finished his term in Madrid. In an op-ed in Haaretz’s Hebrew edition he summarized what he termed as a very dismal stay and seemed genuinely relieved to leave.

This kind of complaint now seems to be the standard farewell letter of all Israeli ambassadors in Western Europe. Schutz was preceded by the Israeli ambassador to London, Ron Prosor, on his way to his new posting at the United Nations in New York, complaining very much in the same tone about his inability to speak in campuses in the United Kingdom and whining about the overall hostile atmosphere. Before him the ambassador in Dublin expressed similar relief when he ended his term in office in Ireland.

All three grumblers were pathetic but the last one from Spain topped them all. Like his colleagues in Dublin and in London he blamed his dismal time on local and ancient anti-Semitism. His two friends in the other capitals were very vague about the source of the new anti-Semitism as both in British and Irish history it is difficult to single out, after medieval times, a particular period of anti-Semitism.

But the ambassador in Madrid without any hesitation laid the blame for his trials and tribulations on the fifteenth century Spanish Inquisition. Thus the people of Spain (his article was entitled “Why the Spanish hate us”) are anti-Israeli because they are either unable to accept their responsibility for the Inquisition or they still endorse it by other means in our times.

This idea that young Spaniards should be moved by atrocities committed more than 500 years ago and not by criminal policies that take place today, or the notion that one could single out the Spanish Inquisition as sole explanation for the wide public support for the Palestinian cause in Spain, can only be articulated by desperate Israeli diplomats who have long ago lost the moral battle in Europe.

But this new complaint — and I am confident that there are more to come — exposes something far more important. The civil society struggle in support of Palestinian rights in key European countries has been successful. With few resources, sometimes dependent on the work of very small groups of committed individuals, and aided lately by its biggest asset — the present government of Israel – this campaign has indeed made life quite hellish for every Israeli diplomat in that part of the world.

So when we come and assess what is ahead of us, we who have been active in the West are entitled to a short moment of satisfaction at a job well done.

The three grumpy ambassadors are also right in sensing that not only has Israeli policy in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip come under attack, but also the very racist nature of the Jewish state has galvanized decent and conscientious citizens — many of them Jewish — around the campaign for peace and justice in Palestine.

Outside the realm of occupation and the daily reality of oppression all over Israel and Palestine, one can see more clearly that history’s greatest lesson will eventually reveal itself in Palestine as well: evil regimes do not survive forever and democracy, equality and peace will reach the Holy Land, as it will the rest of the Arab world.

But before this happens we have to extricate ourselves from the politicians’ grip on our lives. In particular we should not be misled by the power game of politicians. The move to declare Palestine, within 22 percent of its original being, as an independent state at the UN is a charade whether it succeeds or not.

A voluntary Palestinian appeal to the international community to recognize Palestine as a West Bank enclave and with a fraction of the Palestinian people in it, may intimidate a Likud-led Israeli government, but it does not constitute a defining moment in the struggle for the liberation of Palestine. It would either be a non-event or merely provide the Israelis a pretext for further annexation and dispossession.

This is another gambit in the power game politicians play which has led us nowhere. When Palestinians solve the issue of representation and the international community exposes Israel for what it is — namely the only racist country in the Middle East — then politics and reality can fuse again.

And slowly and surely we will be able to put back the pieces and create the jigsaw of reconciliation and truth. This must be based on the twofold recognition that a solution has to include all the Palestinians (in the occupied territories, in exile and inside Israel) and has to be based on the construction of a new regime for the whole land of historical Palestine, offering equality and prosperity for all the people who live there now or were expelled from it by force in the last 63 years of Israel’s existence.

The obvious discomfort the three diplomats felt and expressed is not due to any cold shoulder shown to them in local foreign ministries or governments. And therefore while many Europeans can make their lives miserable, their respective governments can still look the other way.

Whether it is financial desperation and external Israeli and American pressure that bought Greece’s collaboration against the Gaza Freedom Flotilla or it is the power of intimidation that silences even progressive newspapers like the Guardian in the West, Israel’s immunity is still granted despite its diplomats’ misery.

This is why we should ensure that not only Israeli ambassadors feel uncomfortable in European capitals, but also all those who support them or are too afraid to confront Israel and hold it to account.

Ilan Pappe is Professor of History and Director of the European Centre for Palestine Studies at the University of Exeter. His most recent book is Out of the Frame: The Struggle for Academic Freedom in Israel (Pluto Press, 2010).

Continue reading July 26, 2011

July 25, 2011

EDITOR: Interesting Friends of Israel

So now we know. A mass murderer, xenophobic racist fascist, is also a great friend of Israel and Zionism. Why am I not surprised? And they call US anti-semites… Tell me who your friends are, and I shall tell you who you are.

‘Norway attack suspect had anti-Muslim, pro-Israel views’: Jerusalem Post

By BEN HARTMAN
07/24/2011 18:37

 

1,500 page manifesto credited to Breivik, accused of killing spree, lays out worldview including extreme screed of Islamophobia, far-right Zionism.

Talkbacks (228)
Anders Behring Breivik, the Norwegian who killed nearly 100 people in a combined terror attack Friday that included car bombings in Oslo and a shooting rampage at an island summer camp, held fiercely anti-Islamic and pro-Israel views, according to a 1,500 page manifesto he uploaded before his killing spree Friday.

In the 1,500-page tome, which mentions Israel 359 times and “Jews” 324 times, Breivik lays out his worldview, which includes an extreme, bizarre and rambling screed of Islamophobia, far-right Zionism and venomous attacks on Marxism and multi-culturalism.

RELATED:
Norway police say killer behind 1,500 page manifesto
Peres calls Norway’s King; PM: Israel can empathize

In one passage, he lashes out at the Western media, which he accuses of unfairly focusing on the wrongdoing of Jews.

“Western Journalists again and again systematically ignore serious Muslim attacks and rather focus on the Jews,” he wrote.

Breivik also took a jab at leftwing Jews.

“Jews that support multi-culturalism today are as much of a threat to Israel and Zionism as they are to us,” he continued.

“So let us fight together with Israel, with our Zionist brothers against all anti-Zionists, against all cultural Marxists/multiculturalists.”

He also stated that Israel is the homeland for Jews largely due to the persecution suffered by Jews at the hands of Muslims, saying “if one acknowledges that Islam has always oppressed the Jews, one accepts that Israel was a necessary refuge for the Jews fleeing not only the European, but also the Islamic variety of anti- Judaism.”

The manifesto also serves as a call-to-arms, of sorts, in which Breivik lays out his reasons for launching the attack, focusing on what he described as the importance of nationalism and the growing scourge of Islam in Europe.

Entitled “2083 – A European Declaration of Independence,” the document states: “as we all know, the root of Europe’s problems is the lack of cultural self-confidence [nationalism] …

this irrational fear of nationalistic doctrines is preventing us from stopping our own national/ cultural suicide as the Islamic colonization is increasing annually …You cannot defeat Islamization or halt/reverse the Islamic colonization of Western Europe without first removing the political doctrines manifested through multiculturalism/ cultural Marxism.”

Breivik did, however, note that he doesn’t hate Muslims in any fashion and that “I have had several Muslim friends over the years, some of which I still respect.”

He also expressed his sympathy for the people of Serbia, and blasted Norway’s support of the 1999 NATO-bombing campaign on Serbia that stopped the expulsion of Kosovar Albanians by Serbian forces.

In addition, he expressed his disgust at his government’s awarding of “the Nobel peace prize to an Islamic terrorist [Arafat] and appeasers of Islam.”

Breivik sneers at those who would spare the lives of women, and in an especially chilling instruction writes, “once you decide to strike, it is better to kill too many than not enough, or you risk reducing the desired ideological impact of the strike. Explain what you have done [in an announcement distributed prior to operation] and make certain that everyone understands that we, the free peoples of Europe, are going to strike again and again.”

July 20, 2011

EDITOR: How Israel has finally flipped its lid…

Yes. Sometimes whole societies do just that; the US during the McCarhty period; Nazi Germany for 12 years after 1933. There are other examples, of course. Somehow, the connection to real;ity is undermined, and the whole social structure crumbles into a farce, with the elites falling for whatever the propaganda position is.

Israel has flipped, at last. This is no good news, of course; societies flip when the pressure gets too much for them, and then they can persuade themselves into quite bizarre positions; it is also when they are most dangerous – to themselves and to others, of course. In their delusion, the ‘whole world is against them’ – an old Israeli adage, of course, but now given new life and meaning. Everyone is mad but them, everyone is insensitive to their anguished existence as tortured torturers…

Below you can read about the various aspects of this mass hysteria in Israel, and the best evidence of it is the official Israeli propaganda film, dubbed ‘Sex with the Psychologist’ which is so sick on so many levels, that we need not bother to analyse any here. It is evidence for a deep social , cultural and political malaise, one beyond help. The society has lost the ability to look in the mirror, because it does not like what it sees, and the best reaction it found is smashing the mirror. This sick little film is evidence, more than all the murder and subjugation carried out by the Israeli forces, to the irreversible crisis the society is in.

The silver lining – the crisis is speeding up the collapse of the ailing society, its gradual avalanche has now achieved the force of a tsunami, as argued =recently by Chomsky. Of course, this mad bear feels cornered and is capable of much damage and mayhem, but, it is right about one thing – it is threatened, not so much by the outside world, but by its own internal contradictions, its collapsing certainties. This was made more dramatic by the fast social changes now taking place in the Arab world, driving the societies towards increased democracy. At the same time, Israel is on the opposite track – it has lost those few democratic symbols it has so enjoyed manifesting for the benefit of naive foreign supporters of the Jewish mini empire based on militarism, illegal occupation and oppression of the Palestinians under its jackboot. This farce, at least, is spared us now – Israel’s nature is crystal clear for all to see, and abhor.

The more undemocratic legislation is heaped up by the Israeli parliament, the more international action against the bully of the Middle East will be likely and effective. The countdown has now started.

Film production company Zed Films behind “Sex with the Psychologist” hasbara video: Electronic Intifada Blog

Submitted by Benjamin Doherty on Thu, 07/07/2011 – 07:45
On 30 June, a new Israeli video appeared on the internet which used satire to attack and misrepresent the Gaza Freedom Flotilla 2. “Sex with the Psychologist” features a young woman seeking treatment for an unspecified but apparently traumatic problem. The psychologist performs a Rorschach test which causes her to tell a story of a young woman who has been abused and harassed.

The video appears to suggest that the woman – and by implication Israel – is the victim of some past sexual assault, and images – related to the flotilla – shown by the psychologist trigger renewed fears and anguish. In line with official Israeli messaging, the video presents the flotilla as a violent provocation, in this case apparently akin to sexual assault, and Israel as a vulnerable woman.

Dimi Reider at +972 Magazine wrote:

Apart from making rather poorly judged use of the experience of real women with real trauma, the July 1st video is also ridiculously sexist; beginning with the cheap camera-pan up the actress’s legs and ending with the fact it was first posted on Youtube a day earlier, under the title “Sex with the Psychologist”.

He identified the actress as Aimee Neistat. Max Blumenthal looked further and found that “Neistat is a Haaretz employee who translates Hebrew content into English.” She also wrote articles for The Jerusalem Post between 2007 and 2010.

The Electronic Intifada has learned that Zed Films produced the short video. Gil Roeh, the founder of Zed Films, wrote the script. The actor in the film is named Björn Nordholm. These facts were on the Zed Films web site as “recent news” on 22 June 2011 but have since been scrubbed. The Google cache of the page states:

“Rorschach test” video

We finished filming to “Rorschach test” video Staring Aimee Neistat and Bjorn Nordholm, Script: Gil Roeh.. Editing now. The video we’ll [sic] be out soon..

EDITOR: The Excellent Jonathan Cook analyses the new low Israel has placed itself with its insane and illegal spate of hysterical legislation!

Israel’s war on nonviolent protest: The Electronic Intifada

Jonathan Cook, Nazareth19 July 2011

Israel’s crushing of nonviolent protest will leave violence as the only remaining option. (Oren Ziv / ActiveStills)

It was a Palestinian legislator who made the most telling comment to the Israeli parliament last week as it passed the boycott law, which outlaws calls to boycott Israel or its settlements in the occupied territories. Ahmed Tibi asked: “What is a peace activist or Palestinian allowed to do to oppose the occupation? Is there anything you agree to?”

The boycott law is the latest in a series of ever-more draconian laws being introduced by the far right. The legislation’s goal is to intimidate those Israeli citizens, Jews and Palestinians, who have yet to bow down before the majority-rule mob.

Look out in the coming days and weeks for a bill to block the work of Israeli human rights organizations trying to protect Palestinians in the occupied West Bank from abuses by the Israeli army and settlers; and a draft law investing a parliamentary committee, headed by the far right, with the power to veto appointments to the high court. The court is the only, and already enfeebled, bulwark against the right’s absolute ascendancy.

Watershed law

The boycott law, backed by Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, marks a watershed in this legislative assault in two respects.

First, it knocks out the keystone of any democratic system: the right to free speech. The new law makes it illegal for Israelis and Palestinians to advocate a nonviolent political program — boycott — to counter the ever-growing power of the half a million Jewish settlers living on stolen Palestinian land.

As the Israeli commentator Gideon Levy observed, the floodgates are now open: “Tomorrow it will be forbidden to call for an end to the occupation [or for] brotherhood between Jews and Arabs.”

Equally of concern is that the law creates a new type of civil, rather than criminal, offense. The state will not be initiating prosecutions. Instead, the job of enforcing the boycott law is being outsourced to the settlers and their lawyers. Anyone backing a boycott can be sued for compensation by the settlers themselves, who — again uniquely — need not prove they suffered actual harm.

Under this law, opponents of the occupation will not even be dignified with jail sentences and the chance to become prisoners of conscience. Rather, they will be quietly bankrupted in private actions, their assets seized either to cover legal costs or as punitive damages.

Human rights lawyers point out that there is no law like this anywhere in the democratic world. Even Eyal Yinon, the naturally conservative legal adviser to the parliament, assessed the law’s aim as stopping a “discussion that has been at the heart of political debate in Israel for more than forty years.” But more than half of Israelis back it, with only 31 percent opposed.

A delusional, self-pitying worldview

The delusional, self-pitying worldview that spawned the boycott law was neatly illustrated this month in a short video “ad” that is supported, and possibly financed, by Israel’s hasbara, or propaganda, ministry. Fittingly, it is set in a psychotherapist’s office.

A young, traumatized woman deciphers the images concealed in the famous Rorschach test. As she is shown the ink blots, her panic and anger grow. Gradually, we come to realize, she represents vulnerable modern Israel, abandoned by friends and still in profound shock at the attack on her navy’s commandos by the “terrorist” passengers aboard last year’s aid flotilla to Gaza.

Immune to reality — that the ships were trying to break Israel’s punitive siege of Gaza, that the commandos illegally boarded the ships in international waters, and that they shot dead nine activists execution-style — Miss Israel tearfully recounts that the world is “forever trying to torment and harm [us] for no reason.” Finally she storms out, saying: “What do you want — for [Israel] to disappear off the map?”

The video — released under the banner “Stop the provocation against Israel” — was part of a campaign to discredit the recent follow-up flotilla from Greece. The solidarity mission was abandoned after Greek authorities, under Israeli pressure, refused to let the convoy sail for Gaza.

Israel’s siege mentality asserted itself again days later as international activists staged another show of solidarity — the “Welcome to Palestine” campaign. Hundreds tried to fly to Israel on the same day, declaring their intention to travel to the occupied West Bank. The goal was to highlight that Israel both controls and severely restricts access to the occupied territories and to Palestinians.

Proving precisely the protesters’ point, Israel threatened airlines with retaliation if they carried the activists and it massed hundreds of soldiers at Ben Gurion airport to greet arrivals. Some 150 peaceful protesters who reached Israel were arrested moments after landing.

Echoing the deranged sentiments of the woman in the video, Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, denounced the various solidarity direct actions as “denying Israel’s right to exist” and a threat to its security.

Rebellion against ghettoization of Palestine

In reality, however, the surge in flotilla activity reflects not an attack on Israel but a growing appreciation by international groups that Israel is successfully sealing off from the world the small areas of the occupied territories left to Palestinians. The flotillas are a rebellion against the Palestinians’ rapid ghettoization.

Although Netanyahu’s comments sound delusional, there may be a method to the madness of measures like the boycott law and the hysterical overreaction to the flotillas.

These initiatives, as Tibi points out, leave no room for nonviolent opposition to the occupation. Arundhati Roy, the award-winning Indian writer, has noted that nonviolence is essentially “a piece of theatre. [It] needs an audience. What can you do when you have no audience?”

Netanyahu and the Israeli right understand this point. They are carefully dismantling every platform on which dissident Israelis, Palestinians and international activists hope to stage their protests. They are making it impossible to organize joint peaceful and nonviolent resistance, whether in the form of boycotts or solidarity visits. The only way being left open is violence.

Is this what the Israeli right wants, believing both that it will confirm to Israelis’ their paranoid fantasies as well as offering a justification to the world for entrenching the occupation?

Netanyahu appears to believe that, by generating the very terror he claims to be trying to defeat, he can safeguard the legitimacy of the Jewish state — and destroy any hope of a Palestinian state being created.

Jonathan Cook won this year’s Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His latest books are Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East (Pluto Press) and Disappearing Palestine: Israel’s Experiments in Human Despair (Zed Books). His website is www.jkcook.net.

A version of this article originally appeared in The National (www.thenational.ae), published in Abu Dhabi.

Video shows IDF officer pointing loaded gun at unarmed Palestinian: Haaretz

YouTube video uploaded by B’Tselem shows an IDF officer cocking his gun and pointing it at a Palestinian man during an IDF operation in the West Bank; IDF says will open investigation into the matter.

A video uploaded to YouTube on Wednesday showed an IDF officer pointing a loaded gun at an unarmed Palestinian in the West Bank village of Beit Ummar, near Hebron, last month.

According to B’Tselem, a human rights organization that uploaded the video, on June 18 IDF forces came to arrest a youth from the village for allegedly throwing stones when his cousin stopped the IDF officer to try to prevent the arrest.

The video shows the IDF officer, a First Lieutenant, shouting and pushing the Palestinian man and then immediately cocking his loaded gun into the man’s face. When the man continued to fight with him, the IDF officer again pointed the gun at him.

The IDF Spokesperson said in response, “On the surface this looks like a serious incident. The incident will be brought to the attention of the commanders and simultaneously an investigation will be opened on the matter.”

Jailed Palestinian leader Barghouti calls for mass rallies to back UN statehood bid: Haaretz

Marwan Barghouti, imprisoned for the murder of Israelis during the Second Intifada, says UN move part of a new strategy that will open door to ‘peaceful, popular resistance’.

Jailed leader Marwan Barghouti has called on Palestinians to stage mass rallies in September in support of a diplomatic bid to gain UN membership for a state of Palestine.

Barghouti, a figure widely respected among many Palestinians, said taking the statehood quest to the United Nations was part of a new strategy that would open the door to “peaceful, popular resistance”.

Jailed Palestinian leader Marwan Barghouti in August 2002. Photo by: AP

Barghouti was convicted of murder for his role in attacks on Israelis during the Second Intifada and was sentenced to life in jail by Israel in 2004.

“I call on our people in the homeland and in the diaspora to go out in a peaceful, million-man march during the week of voting in the United Nations in September,” Barghouti said in a statement written from his jail cell in Israel.

With the Middle East peace process at a standstill, the Palestinians, backed by the Arab League, have decided to seek full admission to the United Nations as part of what they are describing as a new approach to their national struggle.

Israel is wary that the September bid could serve as a trigger for protests inspired by uprisings across the region.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, an Israeli military commander said on Tuesday Israel would reinforce its border defenses in anticipation of such protests.

The United States, the main sponsor of the two-decade-old peace process, has objected to the Palestinian diplomatic offensive, instead calling for a resumption of negotiations that
were derailed by an impasse over settlement construction in the West Bank. Israel says the Palestinians aim to isolate and delegitimize it.

A U.S. veto at the Security Council is likely to thwart the Palestinian bid for full UN membership for a state of Palestine in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem.

“Advancing our cause”

In such a scenario, the Palestinians have indicated they will table a UN General Assembly resolution that would elevate their status to that of “a non-member state” from an “observer”.

They expect such a move to succeed, thanks to the support of 120 countries – a number they expect to grow to at least 130.

Barghouti, a leading member of the Fatah movement led by President Mahmoud Abbas, called on all Palestinian parties to back the diplomatic offensive and “to confront the American-Zionist veto”.

For many Palestinians, Barghouti remains a symbol of their national struggle. His supporters portray him as a Palestinian Nelson Mandela – a charismatic figure who could unite Palestinians and galvanize their quest for statehood.

Riyad Mansour, the Palestinian envoy to the United Nations, said an upgrade of the Palestinians’ UN status to “non-member state” would bring with it benefits including allowing the Palestinians full membership of UN agencies.

“You are automatically allowed to become a full member of all the agencies: WHO, UNESCO, UNICEF, etc,” he told journalists during a briefing in Ramallah on Wednesday.

He said September’s UN General Assembly would mark a historic moment in the Palestinian struggle. “We are going to accomplish certain things in this coming session that will be extremely significant to advancing our cause,” he said.

Continue reading July 20, 2011

July 13, 2011

EDITOR: Israel launches itself into outer space!

So, while all around the world silly people like Cathrine Ashton do not understand the great value of the new anti-BDS law, Netanyahu explains to the world that the law is a mark of Israeli democracy. A genius of a man, this PM, now in command of the Israeli spaceship, which is at last free of the earth gravity, and is speeding into outer space without a way back. Bye bye, Israel, one wishes to utter, but of course, some other people are involved here, ones who did not agree to go into outer space, of course. Some of the new regulations, like those governing schools and kindergartens, which have just been published, would not go amiss in Nazi Germany. I cannot bring them here today, as the Haaretz paper, in atypical act of self-censorship, has not translated them into English, and may well fail to do so. Another sign of the train heading for the rocks.

On the face of it, Israel was never stronger – financially (as a result mainly of being the 4th arms exporter in the world. Israel sells death!) it is in an excellent shape, politically, it is supported like never before (see the episode of Flotilla II and how governments fall over each other in their willingness to break their own laws to support Israel illegal activities) – it has just been given almost all the privileges of the EU membership – what could go wrong for them?

But looking at it like this leaves out the global growth of the BDS and anti-Zionist movement across the globe. While governments are prepared to support Israel’s crimes, their people are more prepared than ever to struggle against those crimes. The sheer proof that Israel itself realises this, is the spate of laws, regulations and attacks on civil rights within Israel, so as to stem the tide. But it is too late to stem the tide. Israel is understood, at last, to be what it always was: a racist, aggressive colonialist regime, ready to break any law and any international treaty to advance its militaristic, illegal occupation and its iniquities. No amount of anti-democratic legislation will ever remove this realisation from the public domain. Israel is losing the war, while claiming victory in the skirmishes it starts itself.

European Union expresses concern over Israel’s boycott law: Haaretz

EU says legislation may affect freedom of expression in Israel; mixed reaction among European Jewish organizations.

The European Union put out a carefully worded but clearly critical statement on the new Israeli boycott law on Wednesday, saying it intended to “discuss this matter and raise our concerns with the Israeli authorities.”

“The EU recognizes Israel’s sovereignty in the legislative process.
Furthermore, the EU does not advocate boycotts,” a spokesperson for foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said in a statement.

“However, as part of such fundamental values as free expression and speech that the EU cherishes and shares with Israel, we are concerned about the effect that this legislation may have on the freedom of Israeli citizens and organizations to express non-violent political opinions.”

Meanwhile, the umbrella organization of French Jewish organizations in France, known as the CRIF, welcomed the controversial new Israeli boycott law Wednesday. The CRIF’s director general Haim Musicant pointed out that a similar such law has long existed in France, much to the satisfaction of the French Jewish community.

“Commercial boycotts of Israel have been illegal in France for many years,” he explained to Haaretz. “And this has been good in fighting such negative action. I believe this is a good model. I know that many other European countries are looking into adopting the French models themselves.”

But, even as such official Jewish organs were applauding the Israeli measures, other community voices were speaking out against them. Yachad, a new British Jewish Israel advocacy organization inspired by the American J-Street, decried the law.

“Yachad will not join those who call for a boycott of Israeli produce because we believe in debate and we are opposed to a policy of isolation. However, we fiercely and unapologetically defend the right of Israelis and Jews to express their opinion as enshrined our tradition and as stated in Israel’s own Basic Law of Human Dignity and Liberty,” said Daniel Reisel, Yachad’s chair.

“The first and most obvious problem with the boycott law is that violates the freedom of individual free speech. To seek to punish someone for their political opinions limits their freedom, creates a climate of fear and suspicion, and compromises the ability of every person to speak their mind,” Yachad went on to said in a statement. “Second, the law violates basic freedom of expression and debate in a democratic society….(and) finally, the anti-boycott law is likely to prove counter-productive. People who have previously resisted the idea of boycotts as political leverage may now start to consider it simply due to the infringement of their freedom of speech which the current law entails.”

Earlier on Wednesday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu defended the boycott law, which was passed in the Knesset Monday night. The law, which penalizes people or organizations who call for a boycott on Israel or the settlements, provoked sharp criticism from opposition MKs and leftist organizations in Israel.

Netanyahu said the law does not taint Israeli democracy. “What stains (Israel’s) image are those savage and irresponsible attacks on a democracy’s attempt to draw a line between what is acceptable and what is not,” he said.

According to the law, a person or an organization calling for the boycott of Israel, including the settlements, can be sued by the boycott’s targets without having to prove that they sustained damage. The court will then decide how much compensation is to be paid. The second part of the law says a person or a company that declare a boycott of Israel or the settlements will not be able to bid in government tenders.

On Tuesday, Israeli leftist organizations launched a legal and a public campaign against the law.

Netanyahu is turning Israel into Iran: Haaretz

Now violence is being privatized. In typical Netanyahu fashion, individuals on the radical right are given the push, the encouragement and the authority to take the “Operation Price Tag” route, with much more than winking approval.
By Sefi Rachlevsky
Benjamin Netanyahu was right when he spoke about the dangers of a messianic, nuclearized Iran, and the difficulty of creating a stable balance of terror with it. That is precisely why the prime minister’s actions are so shocking. In our terms, they constitute a serious dereliction of duty. In the terms of the circles he is so fond of inflame in a demonstration, they constitute treason.

In the face of a nuclearizing Iran, in addition to international sanctions and covert actions, Israel has three main options: a military assault, which is looking increasingly irresponsible; a switch from insufficiently deterrent nuclear ambiguity to a policy of open nuclear deterrence; and reliance on NATO’s umbrella of defense.

All three options share a single key: a close alliance with the West. Without it, the thought of a military operation, and especially a day-after scenario, are not even a hallucination. Without it, there can be no move to effective open deterrence. Without it, there is no huddling under NATO’s nuclear defense umbrella.

This was one of the main causes that led Yitzhak Rabin to choose to move toward a strategic, stabilizing peace before Iran acquired nuclear capabilities. It should have been one of the reasons that would bring Israel now to the unequivocal recognition – as a matter of principle – of a Palestinian state based on the 1967 lines. Not a miserly formula for purposeless negotiations, but rather genuine generosity, in the spirit of the Declaration of Independence.

This is not a simple deal, Itamar in exchange for Bushehr. But were it not for the 1956 withdrawal from Sinai, there would be no Dimona; if not for the peace with Egypt, there would have been no attack on Iraq’s nuclear reactor. An alliance with the West requires proof of intentions and of values. But Netanyahu consciously chooses to go in the opposite direction, thus revealing the depth of his unbridled extremism.

Under normal circumstances, the military establishment is to the right of the political establishment. That is its nature. Only in rare cases is the situation reversed, as in the waning days of the Second Temple Era, and in fascist regimes. In all these cases, the end is similar. Israel is now joining these anomalies. Not only is Netanyahu not building an alliance with the world’s democracies, he is creating a fascist, messianic Iran here. Churchill, whom he claims to admire, distanced himself from Britain’s racist Naziphiles. Here, things are approaching the threshold of non-distancing. Netanyahu’s coalition is vigorously legislating “red heifer laws,” that purify the impure and pollute the pure. Laws that invert the legal and the criminal.

It is no longer just the government of Rabbi Dov Lior. Now it is simply the “dov” regime – the Hebrew acronym for the suppression of traitors. Dov was the name of an extreme right-wing group that got its start among groups of university students in Jerusalem. Dov Shilansky often lectured them about the Altalena. These groups would later give rise to Avigdor Lieberman. The organization’s name is an acronym for its philosophy: dikui bogdanim [“suppression of traitors” in Hebrew].

Now violence is being privatized. In typical Netanyahu fashion, individuals on the radical right are given the push, the encouragement and the authority to take the “Operation Price Tag” route, with much more than winking approval. The days that preceded Rabin’s assassination as a “traitor” are returning. Rabbi Dov Lior, who by dint of receiving tens of thousands a shekels a month and controlling an Israel Defense Forces hesder yeshiva is a direct extension of the Israeli government, is not alone. The method of delegating revenge against traitors to private hands, after incitement by the leader, is growing stronger and more focused.

Menachem Livni, the head of the “Jewish underground” terror organization, who when he was convicted of multiple murders testified that he had acted on behalf of Lior, now has a vineyard and a winery. Now, anyone who does not want to directly fund Livni is a potential target for “price tag” actions from him, and without being subject to the restrictions of the criminal code and the attorney general. Now, in addition to the weapons entrusted to him by the IDF, Netanyahu is giving Livni and the Yitzhar thugs the weapons of civil prosecution, with no need for proof of damages.

Those who are against the occupation and who refuse to cooperate with the criminality of the settlements will now have to pay huge sums for their unwillingness to cooperate – in addition to paying their taxes, which fund the illegal settlement enterprise. Navot must pay for being put to death by Ahab.

Our own Captain Ahab is leading the boat and the whales to disaster. Removing him from power is becoming a top global priority.

Israel’s McCarthy coalition is on a dangerous power trip: Haartez

The slew of anti-democratic laws introduced by the current Knesset constitutes one of the darkest chapters in Israeli history.
By Carlo Strenger
The flood of anti-democratic laws that were proposed, and partially implemented, by the current Knesset, elected in February 2009, constitute one of the darkest chapters in Israeli history. The opening salvo was provided by Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu party with its Nakba law, that forbids the public commemoration of the expulsion of approximately 750,000 Palestinians during the 1948 war.

Since then, a growing number of attempts were made to curtail freedom of expression and to make life for human rights groups more difficult. The latest instance is the boycott law that is passed this Monday by the Knesset, even though its legal advisor believes it to be a problematic infringement on freedom of speech.

The law, as Knesset Member Nitzan Horowitz from the leftist Meretz Party said, is outrageous, shameful and an embarrassment to Israel’s democracy.

What stands behind this frenzy of attempts to shut down criticism? The answer, I believe, is fear, stupidity, confusion – and now also a power-trip.

The result of Netanyahu’s and Lieberman’s systematic fanning of Israelis’ existential fears is tangible: polls show that Israelis are deeply pessimistic about peace; they largely do not trust Palestinians, and in the younger generation belief in democratic values is being eroded.

But this pessimism and siege-mentality is not only to be found in ordinary Israeli voters, but also in the political class. After talking to a number of right-wing politicians, I am unfavorably impressed by their total lack of understanding of the international scene. They have profound misconceptions about the Free World’s attitude towards Israel, and very little real understanding of the paradigm shift towards human rights as the core language of international discourse. They buy into Netanyahu’s adage that Israel’s existence is being delegitimized, rather than realizing that Israel’s settlement policy is unacceptable politically and morally to the whole world.

Out of their utter confusion between international criticism of Israeli policies and existential danger for Israel, the right-wing coalition members look for a scapegoat to be blamed for Israel’s unprecedented isolation. The Israeli left and Human Rights organizations are an easy target. Instead of understanding that Israel’s settlement policy is a genuine catastrophe, they claim that NGOs provide the international community with ammunition for criticizing Israel, and are trying to silence them.

Confusion, ideology and a growing intoxication by the coalition’s unchecked power create the explosive mix that is drawing Knesset members into the maelstrom of ever more anti-democratic measures, of which the boycott law is the latest, but by no means last installment. The passing of the boycott law is giving the right-wing MKs a sense of unbridled supremacy: Yisrael Beitenu and Likud MK Danny Danon are already pushing for a committee to investigate what they call “leftist” organizations and NGOs.

They are working all their might to turn Israel into an illiberal democracy. They are turning into a classic case of what Alexandre de Tocqueville, one of the great observers of democracy, called “the tyranny of the majority”, using their clout without any restraint.

Drunk with power, they do not listen to the Knesset’s legal advisor; they will not listen to American Jewry, including the recently right-leaning ADL, as well as the US State Department who are warning them that they have crossed the line of what is democratically acceptable, and harmed freedom of expression grievously.

The next step is under way: The Supreme Court has been a thorn to Israel’s right for a long time, because it tries to uphold universal human rights. The coalition is now trying to break one of pillars of democracy, the separation of powers, and to undermine the Supreme Court’s ability to function as a democratic balance to the Knesset’s power.

A new Likud initiative proposes that the Knesset should be able to veto candidates for the Supreme Court. The new system would “allow the committee to introduce to the court a different state of mind and allow them to influence the legal system”. In simple words: they want both to intimidate the Supreme Court, and gain control over its judicial philosophy, to bring it in line with their chauvinistic ideology. Once this happens, Netanyahu’s proud statements that Israel is the only liberal democracy in the Middle East will no longer be true.

A final word on Netanyahu and Barak: Both of them are sufficiently ashamed of their coalition’s actions, in order not to show up for the vote on the boycott law. If they think that this absolves them from responsibility, they are dreadfully wrong. History will judge their cowardice harshly: their legacy will be to have presided over Israel’s descent into rabid McCarthyism.

EDITOR: Meanwhile, back at the farm, Israel continues to act criminally, attacking and killing with total immunity. Nothing has changed as far as Palestinians are concerned – it is the same occupation and the same brutality.

Israeli army kills man in Nablus, hits Gaza targets: BBC

Relatives mourned the death of Ibrahim Sarhan at the Rafidiya Hospital in Nablus
A Palestinian man has been killed in an Israeli military raid on a West Bank refugee camp.

The Israeli military said troops fired at a man who tried to evade arrest in the el-Fara camp north of Nablus.

But a witness said residents had thrown stones at the troops, who responded with live fire, killing 21-year-old university student Ibrahim Sarhan.

In Gaza, Israeli aircraft struck two suspected weapons factories overnight, injuring a Palestinian woman.

The air strikes also damaged the main water pipe in an eastern neighbourhood of Gaza City, cutting water to a large part of the city, said Gaza’s emergency services spokesman Adham Abu Selmiya.

Israel’s military said the air strikes came in retaliation for rockets fired from Gaza into Israel on Tuesday.

Another rocket hit southern Israel on Wednesday morning, Israel’s military said, but no-one was hurt in the attacks.

‘Bled to death’
Omar Sarhan said his son was shot after attending morning prayers in a local mosque, and bled to death because no ambulance was allowed to attend to him.

The 21-year-old had been shot twice, once in each thigh, and was dead by the time he reached hospital, Palestinian medics said.

Israel’s military said the dawn raid was part of “routine activity” at the refugee camp.

“One of the Palestinians tried to flee arrest, at which point the soldiers began an arrest procedure, eventually firing at his lower body,” a spokeswoman told the AFP news agency.

Seven Palestinians were arrested during the raid, the spokeswoman said, adding that an explosive device was hurled at Israeli troops during the operation. No soldiers were injured.

The Israeli army often carries out raids in Palestinian town and cities, some of which are coordinated with Palestinian police, says the BBC’s Jon Donnison from Ramallah.

The West Bank has been under Israeli military occupation since 1967.

Continue reading July 13, 2011