Dear Friends,
Just 5 items below tonight. 1 brief report deals with the continuing shooting, killing, and mess raging between Israel and Gaza these days. The news from the Palestine News and Information Agency WAFA informs us of the killing of a woman and her daughter when one of the projectiles hit their house in the Gaza strip, and also reports the killing of Palestinian kids playing. I presume that most of the latest events here are reported in the commercial media, to which you have access and therefore don’t need me to inform you of what is taking place.
The items begin with a petition. Please consider signing, and also consider convincing organizations that you belong to and church groups to sign.
Item 2 reveals that Goldstone was bullied into ‘recanting’ portions of the report of the committee that he headed on Cast Lead. This is possibly true, but if it is then Goldstone in my eyes at least is a lesser person than I had thought he was. It is sad to see a judge and individual known for his astuteness dragged down to so low a level.
In item 3 Alan Dershowitz drags Archbishop Desmond Tutu’s name through mud. Apart from that, Dershowitz says absolutely zilch that would prove his main contention, namely, that Israel is not an apartheid state (“I am critical of Bishop Tutu’s call for boycotts against apartheid Israel, because it is a totally false charge.”) Such a statement should have been backed with evidence, especially since it comes from a renowned lawyer. But it doesn’t. It comes with examples that in no way prove the statement. Besides, the statement itself is correct. Israel is an apartheid state—both in Israel proper and in the West Bank. Since Dershowitz aims his argument at Israel rather than the West Bank, which is where most people claim that apartheid exists, let us glance at some of his contentions.
To begin, let me call to mind aspects that show that Israel is an apartheid state. I have done this before, so that we can run through the evidence fairly rapidly. Apartheid begins with the Law of Return, which allows every Jew (with certain exceptions, as, e.g., being a criminal) to come and settle in Israel and to receive citizenship. This is not true for persons who are not Jews. Moreover, Israel’s land laws privilege Jews over Arabs. Also, a Jew can marry any person he/she wishes from whatever country and live with the spouse in Israel, but a Palestinian citizen of Israel who weds a person from the West Bank or Gaza is not allowed to remain here with his/her spouse.
These examples alone show that Israel is an apartheid state. And when we move to the West Bank we find that Jewish Israeli settlers are under Israeli law, whereas Palestinians are under Israel’s Military law. Moreover, no Palestinian can live in a Jewish settlement in the West Bank. Likewise, cars with Palestinian plates are stopped at checkpoints, whereas Israeli plates usually enable a car to whiz through without being checked, unless the driver is obviously an Arab. Need I say more to show that Israel both within the 1949 armistice line and beyond Israel practices apartheid.
As for the argument that Israel “is a racially diverse country” and that some of its Arab citizens have certain rights, this does not prove that apartheid does not exist, any more than the fact that Marian Anderson sang in the opera proved that the United States was not a racist state. Likewise the argument that conditions in apartheid South Africa were worse than those in Israel does not prove that Israel is not an apartheid state. In fact all of the points Dershowitz makes are beside the issue—as you can see for yourselves. Dershowitz even contradicts himself in one instance. He says that “boycott is the personification of collective punishment” which is more or less correct, then later goes on to depict the boycott against the Jewish state as being “reminiscent of the Nazi boycott of Jewish goods in the 1930s.” Either it is collective punishment, or it is against a given race, religion, etc. The call for boycott on Israel is not against a race or religion. It is against the policies of Israel’s leaders, and is therefore not reminiscent of the Nazi boycott.
I presume that others will take Dershowitz’s speech apart. I hope that with this commentary on both Goldstone and Dershowitz I can bury the subject of the report.
Item 4 includes several brief reports from the Palestine news and information agency WAFA.
Item 5 might be a sign of things to come: “Egyptians march on the Israeli Embassy.” Till the revolts came along, Israel could count on Egypt and Jordan and other countries to toe the line. Now we have another and different situation, which Israel might feel more strongly as the revolutionaries become statesmen/women. We shall see.
Enough talking!
Time for you to read. And may the shooting stop—on both sides!
Dorothy
1.PRESS RELEASE: THE ITALIAN COALITION “STOP THAT TRAIN” MEETS WITH PIZZAROTTI:
Withdraw from the Israeli Project for the A1 Railway
In Italy, “Stop That Train” launches a campaign calling on Pizzarotti & C. SpA to withdraw from the construction of the Israeli high-speed railway crossing the occupied Palestinian territories. The German Ministry of Transport defines the project as “potentially in violation of international law.”
On April 9 a demonstration will be held at Pizzarotti headquarters in Parma (Italy).
www.stopthattrain.org
The Italian Coalition “Stop That Train” recently met with Pizzarotti & C. SpA, a private company from Parma involved in the construction of a new Israeli railway that would allow Israeli commuters to travel from Jerusalem to Tel Aviv in just 28 minutes. In particular, Pizzarotti is involved in Section C, which crosses the internationally recognized borders of Israel and penetrates the occupied Palestinian territories in the West Bank.
The A1 railway is the largest infrastructure project the Israeli government has undertaken in the last ten years and for 6.5 km cuts through the occupied Palestinian territories, resulting in further confiscation of land and putting at least three communities at risk, including the villages of Beit Surik and Beit Iksa.
The call to action of the Italian Coalition “Stop That Train” has already been endorsed by more than 60 national and international organizations, including Israeli, as well as local groups throughout Italy. The coalition calls on Pizzarotti to withdraw from the project, which constitutes a flagrant violation of International Law, in contravention of international norms on human rights, including the Fourth Geneva Convention prohibiting exploitation of land by an occupying power.
During the meeting with “Stop That Train,” Pizzarotti representatives reiterated what had already been declared in a statement issued by the company on March 17. “Pizzarotti has never played and does not currently play a decision-making role in the planning and design of the railway” and the company is involved exclusively in the construction of a tunnel (T3) for the area “which is fully located within the boundary marked by the Green Line.”
The Italian Coalition “Stop That Train” maintains that regardless of Pizzarotti’s involvement or not in the design of the A1 line, the company has an obligation to verify that projects in which it is involved are in accordance with human rights and international law. This is particularly true in areas of conflict such as Israel and Palestine.
The Israeli feminist organization, the Coalition of Women for Peace (CWP), which authored a 28-page dossier on the project, stresses that Pizzarotti, through a joint venture with the Israeli Shapir Civil and Marine Engineering, “signed a contract to construct the entire T3 tunnel. Nowhere in the contract signed by Pizzarotti does it state that the company is not involved or not responsible for the section of the tunnel that is located in the West Bank. … Stating, as Pizzarotti does, that it is not responsible for the eastern portal of the tunnel and that it will not carry out the excavation of the section that crosses the West Bank is, therefore, simply a way of evading the issues and an attempt to dodge its responsibilities.”
The project also includes involvement of DB International, a company fully owned by the German government, which has a contract with the Israeli Railways to provide engineering expertise for the electrification of the rail line. In a letter dated March 14, 2011, the German Minister of Transport defined the project for the A1 railway as “problematic for foreign policy and potentially in violation of international law”, indicating that DB International has confirmed in writing that it will cease all activities in the project.
The Italian Coalition “Stop That Train” is committed to continue the campaign with determination, calling on Pizzarotti to withdraw from the project. A new web site for the campaign was recently launched (www.stopthattrain.org) and on April 9 a demonstration will be held at Pizzarotti headquarters in Parma. In addition, actions similar to those used against Veolia, a French company forced to announce its withdrawal from the light rail construction project in occupied East Jerusalem, are currently being planned.
]
To endorse the campaign: fermarequeltreno@gmail.com
—
If you do not want to receive any more newsletters, this link
To update your preferences and to unsubscribe visit this link
Forward a Message to Someone this link
=========================================
2. [forwarded by Terry]
‘Goldstone was bullied into recanting’
JOHANNESBURG, SOUTH AFRICA Apr 07 2011 21:08
http://mg.co.za/article/2011-04-07-goldstone-was-bullied-into-recanting
Judge Richard Goldstone’s partial recantation of a United Nations-sponsored report on Israel’s invasion of Gaza has predictably divided the local Jewish community, with a prominent anti-Zionist academic insisting that the judge was bullied and a Zionist spokesperson describing it as “a victory”.
Goldstone, a former South African Constitutional Court judge, chaired the UN panel whose report accused both the Israeli Defence Force and the Palestinian movement Hamas of committing war crimes during “Operation Cast Lead”.
In a comment piece for the Washington Post last Friday, he recanted the September 2009 report’s finding that the IDF intentionally targeted civilians during the invasion which began in December 2008. “If I had known then what I know now, the Goldstone Report would have been a different document,” he said.
About 1 400 Palestinians, at least half of them civilians, were killed in the operation, which was launched in response to rise in rocket attacks from Gaza. Some 7 000 civilians were injured, and more than 4 000 houses were destroyed, together with much of Gaza’s infrastructure and buildings. Israel lost 10 soldiers, while three civilians were killed by Hamas rockets.
Goldstone blamed Israel’s refusal to cooperate with the inquiry for what he deemed inaccuracies in the report.
But University of Johannesburg research professor and political analyst Steven Friedman said that “for an internationally respected judge, Goldstone’s arguments are laughable. I should imagine that the pressure on him (from the Jewish community) became untenable”.
In his article Goldstone had accepted an Israeli investigation finding that the shelling of a Gaza home, in which an entire Palestinian family of 29 was killed, was the result of an IDF commander’s erroneous interpretation of a drone image. The officer is under investigation for having ordered the attack.
“It’s a ridiculous argument,” Friedman said. “One assumes that Goldstone is doing this because of intense bullying.”
Friedman said he has personally experienced the pressure that the Jewish community can bring on dissenting members.
Former anti-apartheid judge Goldstone, 72 this year, is an active member of the local Jewish community. Yet he was almost barred from attending his grandson’s bar mitzvah last year because of threats of protests should he appear. The threats were withdrawn and he attended, under heavy guard and in a hostile atmosphere.
Zev Krengel, chairperson of the South African Jewish Board of Deputies, denied the charges of bullying. “After the bar mitzvah he was questioned, but this was done in a very professional way, in discussions about the report. There was no pressure whatsoever,” said Krengel.
However, in an interview with Israeli website Ynetnews, Zev’s brother Avrom Krengel, chairperson of the South African Zionist Federation, said the Jewish lobby in South Africa had played a role on Goldstone’s confession, “We met him about a year ago, and during the meeting he insisted on his stance. We, on the other hand, told him why we were angry with him,” he said.
“He suffered greatly, especially in the city he comes from. We took sides against him, and it encourages us to know that our way had an effect against the international pressure and made him admit and regret his remarks.”
Friedman noted that the community had not welcomed Goldstone back. “The irony here is that he’s not even getting what he wanted,” said Friedman. “They seem to be baying for his blood, asking him to grovel, or fall on his sword.”
Israeli media responded to Goldstone’s article with a mixture of jubilation and anger, with one writer noting that Goldstone “is undeserving of either forgiveness or mercy”.
Zev Krengel, who was in Israel when he spoke to the M&G, said that the tone in the Israeli media was not gloating, but one of vindication. “But the report has done so much harm already. So it’s a subdued victory… a hollow victory, you could say.”
He said there were hopes that Goldstone, who has stopped granting interviews to the media, would say more and formally repudiate the report.
“From our point of view it would be a true victory if he totally repudiates the entire process of how it was done,” he said, who insisted that while the Israeli army was committed to harming as few civilians as possible.
“There would never have been any Gaza deaths if Hamas did not start the bombing,” he said.
Source: Mail & Guardian Online
Web Address: http://www.mg.co.za/article/2011-04-07-goldstone-was-bullied-into-recanting
=================================
3. [forwarded by Terry]
South African Charge of Israeli Apartheid Rings Hollow
by Alan M. Dershowitz
April 5, 2011
http://www.hudson-ny.org/2019/south-african-charge-israeli-apartheid
A recent speaking tour about Israel brought me to South Africa, following a visit to Norway. Both countries are hostile environments when it comes to the Jewish state. In Norway, the three faculties of the Norwegian universities refused to host me, but student groups broke the boycott against pro-Israel speakers by inviting me to speak. In South Africa, the boycott held and I was precluded from speaking at any university.
The South African boycott against me, as an advocate for Israel, was spearheaded by a sitting judge named Dennis Davis, who aspires to serve on South Africa’s highest court and who authored an op ed in the Cape Times headlined “Dershowitz is not welcome here!” It was cosigned by a dozen other mainstream lawyers and academics strongly opposed to Israel.
I was originally invited to speak to the faculty and students at the University of Cape Town but Judge Davis pressured the school to make it impossible for me to appear. The University’s excuse was insufficient interest in my talk to warrant the heavy security my presence would have required. So instead I spoke off campus. More than 1,000 people including hundreds of students showed up for my talk. Another 1,000 people attended a second talk.
The justification offered by Davis for trying to censor me is that I have been critical of Bishop Desmond Tutu for calling Israel an Apartheid state and for accusing the Jewish people of being “arrogant,” “peculiar,” “claiming a monopoly” on God, and on the Holocaust. He also accused me of being opposed to peace and of supporting Israel’s occupation of the West Bank, despite my long term support for the two-state solution and the end of the occupation. And he totally mischaracterized by views on torture, collective punishment and academic freedom. (For a full rebuttal to Davis’ pack of lies see my response in the Cape Times E-dition 3.28.11 and 3.31.11)
I am critical of Bishop Tutu’s call for boycotts against apartheid Israel, because it is a totally false charge. Israel is the only nation in the Middle East that does not practice any form of apartheid: Jordan prohibits Jews from becoming citizens or owning land; Saudi Arabia practices gender apartheid; all Muslim countries engage in sexual orientation apartheid; Hamas is notorious for its anti-Christian apartheid; and the Palestinian Authority has said that “no Jew” will ever be allowed to live in a Palestinian state. Israel, on the other hand, is a racially diverse country in which Arabs serve in the Knesset, on the Supreme Court, on university faculties and even in the Cabinet. The court that recently convicted Israel’s former president of rape included an Arab judge. Nothing like this ever happened in apartheid South Africa.
Indeed, Tutu’s South Africa, remains a far more segregated country today than Israel. Poor blacks live in segregated temporary settlements, and de facto apartheid can be seen throughout South Africa.
Moreover, the South African government, the African National Congress and Bishop Tutu himself have far worse human rights records than does Israel. They have supported some of the most despotic regimes in the world, simply because the despots who head these regimes in Libya, Iran, Cuba, China, Zimbabwe, and the Palestinian governments in the West Bank and Gaza–sided with their legitimate struggle against apartheid in years past.
Yet in a hypercritical display of double-standard immorality, they will never forgive Israel for its support of Dr. Klerk’s South Africa, despite the reality that most Arab and Muslim nations traded extensively with the apartheid regime. They demand a moral pass for serving as enablers of repression on the ground that these tyrants supported them, but they refuse to give Israel a pass for having supported a tyrannical regime that helped them during trying times.
Bishop Tutu’s call for a boycott against the Jewish state is hypocrisy at its worst. First, a boycott is the personification of collective punishment directed against all Israelis, regardless of their individual views or actions. Second, it singles out only Israel for a boycott. while encouraging “reconciliation” (and trade) with some of the world’s worst human rights offenders. Third, it hurts the poorest people mostly blacks in South Africa. Consider the recent boycott of Ben Gurion University by the University of Johannesburg, a boycott encouraged by Tutu. Ben Gurion has helped Johannesburg with research on water purification, which affects many poor South Africans. This joint research project which helps South Africa far more than Israel has now been ended because of the Tutu-inspired boycott.
Now Tutu has called for a worldwide cultural, academic and economic boycott against the Jewish state, a boycott reminiscent of the Nazi boycott of Jewish goods in the 1930s. The difference, of course, is that today a total boycott of Israeli products would include cell phones, Intel processors, numerous medical technologies and pharmaceuticals, and important environmental and agricultural innovations.
I’m proud of standing up against Bishop Tutu’s singular bigotry against the Jewish nations and the Jewish people. I will continue to do so until and unless he stop applying a double-standard to all things Jewish.
