NOVANEWS
Dear Friends,
7 items this evening in addition to the message that I sent separately earlier from Professor Nurit Peled-Elhanan, and which I hope that you will (or have) read.
Item 1 is on the same subject—the textbook case, which Larry Derfner claims is closed (I am not so sure. D) . But, Defner assures us, other cases will follow, and on this I agree. Israel’s governments will continue to lay the blame for failed talks on the Palestinians.
Item 2 is a thank you from the Rabbis for Human Rights for the many letters that were sent to President Shimon Peres asking him to intervene in the case of Susya.
Item 3 is also from the RHR, but this time in an informative note on “Who is really taking over the Negev.”
Item 4 reports that the tide has turned against opponents for the event on BDS at Brooklyn College. Thank goodness.
Item 5 invites all in the area to a screening at UC Berkeley of a movie on the 2010 endeavor for UC Berkeley to divest. Spouse and I arrived that same day in Oakland, and rushed to Berkeley to be present at the event. We (those on the pro side) almost won!
Item 6 is the PCHR report on Human Rights Violations the past week.
Item 7 is a reflection, written by a Catholic, and hence its inclusion of God. But it is a beautiful dream that even those of us who are not religious can share.
That’s it for today.
All the best,
Dorothy
++++++
1 +972 Magazine Thursday, February 7, 2013
Palestinian textbook case closed, but more trumped-up Israeli charges expectedThis week’s publication of a U.S.-funded study cleared the Palestinians of charges that their schoolbooks ‘demonize’ Israel. This was not, however, the first hoop they’ve been made to jump through, and it won’t be the last.
By Larry Derfner
The Israeli and U.S. Jewish establishment reaction to the terrible news that the Palestinians don’t demonize Jews in their textbooks reminded me of the long-forgotten uproar over the Palestinian Covenant. Same bullshit. The stout-hearted nationalist Jews in the U.S. and Israel were saying in unison, “How can we ever trust the Palestinians to make peace when their covenant talks about ”liberating all of Palestine’?” And they made this their cause celebre – they lobbied Congress, they lobbied Clinton (this was in the mid-to-late 1990s), and Clinton pressured Arafat, until finally Arafat convened the relevant PLO council and they voted to take out the offending phrases. Clinton even went to Gaza at the end of 1998 for the historic event. He told the assembly: “You have sent, I say again, a powerful message not to the government, but to the people of Israel. You will touch people on the street there. You will reach their hearts there.”
I loved that. Nobody in Israel, no Jew on earth gave a good goddamn that they changed the Palestinian Covenant. But then none of them cared about the original “liberating all of Palestine” Palestinian Covenant, either. As soon as the vote in Gaza to amend it was finally taken, the whole issue vanished for the Israeli and American Jewish right as if it had never existed. This particular orange had been squeezed dry, and now it was time to move on – to find another issue over which to put the Palestinians on the defensive, to keep the world’s flashlight in their eyes and not in Israel’s, to find another hoop for them to jump through before Israel might be asked to slow the occupation train down just a tad.
So it is with the Palestinian textbooks. All this supposed distress over what the Palestinians are teaching their children about Israel and the Jews, this insistence that they clean up their textbooks as a condition for “peace” – it’s another one of the old “stop Oslo” ploys of the Israeli and American Jewish right. A bunch of right-wing propagandists like Itamar Marcus and Palestinian Media Watch have been harping on all this “demonization” in Palestinian textbooks, and the intended effect, of course, has been to discredit Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian Authority, to blacken the Palestinians’ name and thus make it harder for them to get Israel off their neck. And that’s what’s happened – right-wing Zionists everywhere who of course don’t know a word of Arabic have been hammering away at the Palestinian textbooks for nearly two decades, saying there can be no peace until those books are scrubbed good and thorough. Do right-wing Zionists want peace? No, they want the Palestinians to keep scrubbing.
But this week a three-year study of Palestinian and Israeli textbooks came out, backed by a $590,000 U.S. State Department grant and billed credibly by its authors as being “among the most comprehensive, fact-based investigations ever done of school textbooks.” It found that while neither side exactly educates its kids for peace, they don’t demonize or vilify the other side, either, except in “very rare” cases.
“Academic study weakens Israeli claim that Palestinian school texts teach hate,” wrote the New York Times. “New textbook study threatens to undercut argument that Palestinian schools preach hate,” wrote the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. Oh no, what will we do? Maybe we can Goldstone these professors. “Whitewashing incitement,” said the Strategic Affairs Ministry. “Maliciously slandering the Israeli educational system and the State of Israel,” said the Education Ministry. “Distorted and counterproductive,” said Abe Foxman, a liberal compared to most other American Jewish machers.
If these people were really concerned about demonization of Israel in Palestinian schoolbooks as an obstacle to peace, they would take the findings of the study as wonderful news – hey, we were worried for nothing, it’s not a problem, let’s make peace! Just like they might have taken the changing of the Palestinian Covenant as great news.
Or like they might have welcomed the PLO’s recognition of Israel 25 years ago, which answered their long-standing No. 1 demand for proof of the Palestinians’ good intentions.
Or like they might be convinced by the PA’s fight against terror under Abbas, which has been their No. 1 demand for the last 25 years.
But no. There is literally nothing the Palestinians can or ever could do to satisfy the demands of the Israeli and American Jewish right – which now have a lock on power – because these are not demands made with an eye toward peace, they’re weapons in an information war to keep the Palestinians down. If the Palestinians recognize Israel, they’ll be told they have to recognize Israel as a Jewish state. If they fight terror, they’ll be told they now have to fight incitement. If they amend the Palestinian Covenant, they’ll be met with blank stares. And if they turn out not to be demonizing Israel in their schoolbooks, they’ll be told that yes they are, and even if they’re not, they’re demonizing Israel somewhere else. If this orange has been squeezed dry, not to worry – there are plenty more oranges where that came from.
Yet another litmus test for the Palestinians was exposed this week as a cynical fraud. Now, moving right along, what are these conditions (four of them, I believe) that Hamas has to meet before Israel will agree to negotiate with them? Same bullshit.
++++
2 From Rabbis for Human Rights via Rabbis for Human Rights [mati.shemoelof@gmail.com]
A new Post “Thank you!” was written on the February 7, 2013 at 3:05 pm on “Rabbis for Human Rights”.
! The Supreme Court Of Israel | Cc: Wikipedia !
Thank you to the over 1,000 of you who in the space of a few days sent letters to President Shimon Peres asking for his intervention in preventing the demolition of the entire village of Susya. If you have not already done so, please forward a copy of your letter to info@rhr.israel.net [1]*. Please also forward to us any response you receive. Thousands of you have entered our Susya website, and many of you have viewed the moving video blog posts filmed by award winning documentary film maker Ibtisam Marana. Keep it up! We hope to have more posts (and perhaps more action requests) soon.*
Many of you have anxiously enquired what happened in Court on Thursday. We were cautiously optimistic about the attitude of the judges, and feel that we succeeded in making the point that neither the position of Regavim nor the position of the State is just. The fact that there is no zoning plan allowing the residents of Susya to build legally, and the fact that the security forces are dragging their feet in dealing with cases of land takeovers, denial of access to lands, inadequate protection against violence, etc., are both functions of the power the State holds over Palestinians because Palestinians are not represented in the bodies controlling their fate.
B’Vrakha,
Rabbi Arik Ascherman Advocate Quamar Mishirqi Asad
Head of RHR’s OT Legal Department
Here is the RHR press release written after we received the Court’s interim decisions on Sunday:
On Sunday (February 2nd) the Israeli Supreme Court Issued Interim Decisions Following Last Thursday’s (31 January) Hearing Regarding the Palestinian Village of Susya
Last Thursday RHR represented the Palestinian village of Susya in Israel’s Supreme Court in one case where the extreme right wing NGO Regavim demanded the demolition of the entire village. The Court also heard RHR’s petition calling for an end of foot dragging by the Israeli Civil Administration in multiple examples of land takeovers, denial of access to Palestinian owned farming and grazing lands, and sources of water, etc. In the first case the Court is giving the Government the time it requested to process an alternative zoning plan submitted by RHR in order to legalize Susya’s homes, and acceded to our demand that 90 days be given to create a second plan for additional homes not represented by RHR and outside the first plan. Regarding RHR’s petition, the Court issued an order demanding that the State report within 60 days on progress made. Last week over 1,000 of letters were sent to President Shimon Peres within several days asking for his assistance to ensure that the residents of Susya are not displaced yet again. The President can not intervene with the court process, but can ask the State to take place to safeguard the residents.
Regarding the petition of the far-right organization Regavim calling for demolition of the village, the court decided – in accordance with attorneys Avital Sharon and Kamer Mishraki of RHR, who represent the village – to grant an extension of 90 days, to allow for the preparation of a plan for the southern section of the village. The state has never provided suitable planning for Palestinian Susya, as it must. The planning system determining the fate of Palestinians in Area C is a military system in which Palestinians are not represented. (It is as if the Palestinian Police were to plan Israeli towns without involving Israelis in the process). Granting the possibility of submitting plans by private parties in dialogue with the villagers is the least that can be expected in terms of justice and fairness.
In the petition that RHR submitted on behalf of the Susya residents against the methodical blockage of Palestinian access to their lands, the court gave the state 90 days to detail its plans. In paragraph 1 of the decision the court directs the State to address in detail each plot around Susya, and in the absence of a court decision, to provide a date by which the investigation will conclude.
Quammar Mishirqi Asad (Attorney heading RHR’s OT Legal Department): “Overall it’s a positive ruling, under the circumstances. You have to understand that the attempt to expell the Palestinian villagers of Susya to the town of Yata, far from their livelihood – their fields – demonstrates a readiness to trample human rights in favor of an unofficial political policy to annex parts of Area C – annexation of land without Palestinians. Any political program must be subject to the principles of human and civil rights.”
Rabbi Arik Ascherman: “The truth is, it is we Israelis who are on trial. How is it that we have created a country in which we that twice expelled families from their homes, reduced them to living on their farmlands in caves, destroyed those caves, and then issued demolition orders on every alternative shelter they built? The prophet Nathan once accused King David of being akin to a rich man who takes the one little ewe lamb of a poor man, “You are that man.” (Samuel II 12:7) When the ruling comes out, we will know if we are that state. King David recognized that he was the man.. If we recognize who we are today, maybe we will succeed in becoming who we want to be tomorrow.”
*A Brief History of Palestinian Susya: [2] *In the 1980’’s the original village was designated an archaeological zone and cleared of its residents with no alternative accommodations; entry by Palestinians was barred, not even as visitors. With no choice the uprooted villagers moved to their nearby fields. All buildings deemed illegal are the result of forced expulsion, as is the destruction of the caves in which most of the villagers lived until 2001 (which is what forced them to set up tents). For more extended history please click Here [3]!
What do you feel about the Supreme Court Proceedings on Thursday (31 January) Regarding the Palestinian Village of Susya? [4]
Links: —— [1] info@rhr.israel.net [2] http://rhr.org.il/eng/index.php/2012/06/the-origin-of-the-expulsion-a-brief-history-of-palestinian-susya-guest-article/ [3] http://rhr.org.il/eng/index.php/2012/06/the-origin-of-the-expulsion-a-brief-history-of-palestinian-susya-guest-article/ [4]https://www.facebook.com/RabbisForHumanRights
http://rhr.org.il/eng/index.php/2013/02/thank-you/
++++
3 From Rabbis for Human Rights via Rabbis for Human Rights [mati.shemoelof@gmail.com]
A new Post “Who’s Really Taking Over the Negev? ” was written on the February 7, 2013 at 2:39 pm on “Rabbis for Human Rights”.
! Bedouins Protest Against The Israeli Government Policy, Al-Arakib, Israel, 3/10/2009 | Cc: Flickr !
The Bedouin are often portrayed as foreign invaders bent on seizing control of Israel’s Negev Desert, but Zionist history suggests a different narrative.
A few days ago, the Israeli government approved an outline for arranging the settlement of the Bedouin, formulated by Minister Benny Begin after a hearing he held. On the surface, it appears there is a gap between Begin’s positive, principled statements in favor of the Bedouin’s rights and his recommendations, which could yet oust many Bedouin from the places they are living.
The government’s approach could be called the “generosity of lords.” Instead of recognizing the Bedouin villages based on the principles of fairness and equality, it expresses willingness to give the “irrational Bedouin” something they seemingly do not deserve, a gesture of goodwill.
Ignored in the background is the fact that the Bedouin have already relinquished most of their lands and are demanding only a tiny area. They definitely do not deserve to be accused of “taking control of the Negev.”
The myth of the takeover of the Negev Desert is being spread by an orchestrated campaign of supposed facts and biased research suggesting that the Bedouin are invaders – nomads who not very long ago came from Saudi Arabia or the Sinai Peninsula and are not native inhabitants of the Negev. The people behind this myth claim they are speaking in the name of Zionism and against its opponents. On this basis, it is easy to understand how the government’s new proposal could be seen as generous, rather than insulting.
But to see how ungrateful and ungracious Israel’s attitude toward the Bedouin is today, you need only peruse the writing of Zalman David Levontin, a Zionist activist and leader from the beginning of the First Aliyah, or Jewish immigration to Palestine around the turn of the 19th century. In his book “To the Land of Our Fathers,” Levontin writes about the encounters between the first Zionist immigrants and the Negev Bedouin. It turns out that even before Theodor Herzl wrote “The Jewish State,” the Bedouin had invited the Zionist immigrants to settle alongside them. Today, though, the descendants of these Jews are brazenly calling the Bedouin “invaders,” and doing so in the name of Zionism.
Levontine’s writing focuses on the year 1882. The Bedouin are depicted as natives of the land. From his descriptions, it is clear they are permanent residents or semi-nomads, certainly not people without any connection to the place who have come from Saudi Arabia just to benefit from the fruits of Zionism.
Levontin was not biased in favor of the Bedouin. He critically describes their aggressive attitude toward immigrants in other places in the country. But of the Negev Bedouin he writes that relations between them and the Jews are good and that they invite the Jews to settle near them and buy lands from them cheaply.
In “To the Land of Our Fathers,” Levontin also writes about a Zionist delegation looking for suitable lands on which to establish a “moshava,” or “farming community,” to be called Rishon Lezion and about how the Negev Bedouin helped with the search. The delegation reported that it had formed a positive impression of the Bedouin and recommended the Negev as the most suitable place for Jewish settlement in the land of Israel – in neighborly proximity to the Bedouin and not in their stead or at the expense of their rights.
The members of the delegation also reported that the Bedouin owned available lands that they were prepared to sell at a low price. It is quite clear that the reference is to extensive tracts, since this delegation was looking for a solution to the settlement of very large numbers of Jews. Mass settlement of this sort did not ultimately prove possible, but many of the lands of Kibbutz Lahav, for example, were purchased from the Al-Turi family from Al-Araqib, a purchase that proves recognition of their ownership.
So where, then, are the invaders? And where is the gratitude towards the people who helped the first pioneers?
And an issue that is more a matter of principle: Who in fact can be considered to be “Taking control” of the Negev? The Bedouin, who the people of the First Aliyah met for the first time when they came from Eastern Europe to their new land, or the Bedouin, who are today claiming ownership of just 5 percent of the lands of the Negev, even though they constitute more than 30 percent of its population? If we look at history, could it perhaps be the Jews who are “taking over”?
For the sake of dispelling any doubt, let it be said that we are not thinking in those terms and we do not believe that history must be a major factor in justifying or negating collective or civil rights. Citizenship and living in a place are sufficiently worthy basises for rights and an egalitarian allotment of lands.
But the government ministers, organizations and citizens using history to undermine the collective right of the Bedouin, and doing so in the name of Zionism, should at least take the trouble to familiarize themselves with the writings of the earliest Zionists. In ignoring history, they are acting disgracefully not only toward the Bedouin but also towards the people in whose name they are speaking.
The writers are activists in the organization Rabbis for Human Rights, a member of the Recognition Forum.
“But to see how ungrateful and ungracious Israel’s attitude toward the Bedouin is today, you need only peruse the writing of Zalman David Levontin, a Zionist activist and leader from the beginning of the First Aliyah, or Jewish immigration to Palestine around the turn of the 19th century. In his book “To the Land of Our Fathers,” Levontin writes about the encounters between the first Zionist immigrants and the Negev Bedouin. It turns out that even before Theodor Herzl wrote “The Jewish State,” the Bedouin had invited the Zionist immigrants to settle alongside them. Today, though, the descendants of these Jews are brazenly calling the Bedouin “invaders,” and doing so in the name of Zionism.”
_This op-ed Moriel Rothman co-wrote with Yariv Mohar was published
in Haaretz [1]_
Links: —— [1] http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/who-s-really-taking-over-the-negev.premium-1.501605#
http://rhr.org.il/eng/index.php/2013/02/whos-really-taking-over-the-negev/
______________________________________________________
You have subscribed to these e-mail notices about new posts to the blog. If you want to change your settings or unsubscribe, please visit:
4 Mondoweiss Wednesday, February 06, 2013
http://mondoweiss.net/2013/02/bloomberg-official-withdraws.html
Supporters of Brooklyn College’s Students for Justice in Palestine held a press conference yesterday to speak out against the attacks on the group’s panel (Photo via @ReclaimLanguage)
By Alex Kane
The tide has suddenly turned hard against opponents of the Students for Justice in Palestine-organized event that is set for tomorrow night at Brooklyn College. Mayor Michael Bloomberg strongly denounced attempts by legislators to threaten the college with funding cuts over the event and also came out in support of the Political Science Department’s right to sponsor the event–a position that puts him to the left of the initial position that some members of the City Council’s Progressive Caucus took. Additionally, that group of progressive politicians, organized by Rep. Jerry Nadler, backed off from their pressure on the Brooklyn College Political Science Department, while another progressive who had signed on to a separate funding threat letter authored by Councilman Lew Fidler withdrew his name.
Bloomberg made the remarks defending Brooklyn College earlier today. “If you want to go to a university where the government decides what kind of subjects are fit for discussion, I suggest you apply to a school in North Korea,” he bluntly said, according to a report by Dana Rubinstein in Capital New York.
Bloomberg, an ardent Zionist who flew into Israel as the country waged a punishing assault on the Gaza Strip, emphasized that he “violently” opposed the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement targeting Israeli human rights violations. But he also said that he “could not agree more strongly with an academic department’s right to sponsor a forum on any topic that they choose.”
Bloomberg continued by saying:
“The last thing we need is for members of our City Council or state legislature to be micromanaging the kinds of programs that our public universities run and base funding decisions on the political views of professors. I can’t think of anything that would be more destructive to a university and its students. The freedom to discuss ideas, including ideas that people find repugnant, lies really at the heart of the university system. And take that away, and higher education in this country would certainly die.”
The New York City mayor also jabbed political opponents of the BDS movement for bringing more attention to the event that it would have gotten without the controversy. “If they just shut up, it would have gone away,” he said.
Even more striking is the new letter issued by the very same group of progressive politicians who initially demanded that the Political Science Department rescind its co-sponsorship of the event. The first letter from this group, which included signers who were members of the Progressive Caucus in the New York City Council, demanded that “Brooklyn College’s Political Science Department…withdraw their endorsement of this event.” (In fact, the department did not “endorse” the event–they explicitly and repeatedly said they agreed to co-sponsor, and not endorse.) But their new letter, posted by Brooklyn College Political Science Professor Corey Robin, backs off. The demand directed at the department now seems to be gone. Instead, they write:
The Political Science Department has put in writing its policy for considering co-sponsorship of student-organized events, making clear that requests from “any groups, departments or programs organizing lectures or events representing any point of view … will be given equal consideration.” However, as has been clear in this instance, the departmental practice of co-sponsorship of specifically student-organized events has caused real confusion among students regarding intent and endorsement of views (as evidenced by Student Body (CLAS) President Abraham Esses’ “Open Letter” in this regard). We, therefore, believe that the policy would be strengthened greatly by the explicit inclusion of language that you and the Department have used on this case – that sponsorship does not imply endorsement.
It’s not a direct repudiation of their earlier letter–you have read between the lines. But these progressives are quietly backing off from their pressure on the Department’s co-sponsorship of the event. (Still, the progressive letter continues to distort the BDS movement by claiming that “advocates of the BDS movement have called for a boycott of Israeli scholars.” In fact, the academic aspect of BDS calls for a boycott of Israeli academic institutions–and not individuals just because they are Israeli.)
Relatedly, a Councilman who was among the signers of the Nadler letter, Stephen Levin, has withdrawn his name from a separate letter written by City Council Assistant Majority Leader Lew Fidler that threatened the college’s funding over the event. Levin’s withdrawal makes him the second legislator to back off from the funding threat, after Councilwoman Letitia James, another progressive official, withdrew her name as well. That leaves eight Council members who have left their names on the Fidler letter.
I have withdrawn my name frm City Council ltr on funding 4 BK College. I maintain my criticism of BDS & impression of BK College endorsement
— Stephen Levin (@StephenLevin33) February 5, 2013
All of this comes a day after Students for Justice in Palestine organized a press conference to speak out against the “escalating attacks” on their event. Donna Nevel of Jewish Voice for Peace and Jews Say No! was there to show her support, and said:
I am pleased to be here today to have the opportunity to speak out in support of Students for Justice in Palestine and all those at Brooklyn College and across the city concerned with ensuring that bullying and intimidation do not succeed in denying students and others the right to engage in critical examination and inquiry of important political ideas.
What we have seen happening here is yet another example of an attempt to suppress and vilify voices critical of Israel and Israeli government policies, a pattern that has become far too common in this city and nation-wide.
It’s bad enough that Alan Dershowitz and Dov Hikind have engaged in a smear campaign. We’ve come to expect that. But city council members who threaten to take away city funding merely because they disagree with the views expressed on a college campus should be ashamed of themselves and should be held accountable for trying to interfere in this way. And they must not prevail.
Nevel also strongly defended the BDS movement:
About the topic that has become so controversial and caused so much condemnation–it needs to be made clear that Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) is a non-violent response to the Israeli government’s violation of basic principles of human rights and international law. It is, in my view, those violations that should be condemned, not strategies such as BDS that are designed to put an end to those violations, and the injustices that they inflict on the Palestinian people.
The entire controversy continues to garner media coverage. The chair of the Political Science Department, Paisley Currah, has authored a piece in the Chronicle of Higher Education defending the event and calling out the hypocrisy of the panel discussion’s opponents.
And this morning, Democracy Now! had on Omar Barghouti, the Palestinian BDS activist who is one of the speakers at tomorrow’s event, and Glenn Greenwald. Watch it here:
Update: This post has been altered slightly to clarify the difference between the Lew Fidler letter and the letter organized by Rep. Jerrold Nadler
++++
5 From: Tom Pessah
Sent: Wed, February 6, 2013 11:33:46 PM
Subject: [cal_sjp] movie tomorrow (Thursday) on 2010 Berkeley divestment campaign
Pressure Points: Israel, Berkeley and the Divestment Resolution
Students for Justice in Palestine invites you to the screening of a new documentary on our historic 2010 divestment campaign at UC Berkeley. For those who were present, for those who only heard about it–come, and bring your friends!
Using interviews, film from the Berkeley student senate proceedings, and supporting documentary footage from Palestinian territories and Egypt, PRESSURE POINTS is a documentary that explores the dynamics of the debate on Israel’s human rights abuses and its historic significance within U.S. social justice movements. Testimony of pro-Israel students from groups such as Hillel and top Israeli diplomat Akiva Tor is counterpointed in the film by witnesses including several Palestinian students, a Holocaust survivor, representatives from Jewish Voice for Peace, diverse student activists, and noted academics.
see the trailer here – https://vimeo.com/52124491
Boalt Hall (near Piedmont and Bancroft), room 134, 7 PM – TOMORROW, Thursday 2/6
Jewish Voice for Peace provides this e-mail list as a community service. JVP does not necessarily endorse any particular event that appears on this distribution list.
++++
6
PCHR
Palestinian Centre for Human Rights LTD(non-profit)
Israeli Forces Continue Systematic Attacks against Palestinian Civilians and Property in the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt)
· The Israeli forces continued to open fire at the Palestinian civilians in the border area of the Gaza Strip
– 2 Palestinian children were wounded in the northern Gaza Strip; the wound of one of whom is serious.
· 2 Palestinian civilians, including a child, were wounded in the northern West Bank.
· The Israeli forces conducted 83 incursions into Palestinian communities in the West Bank and 2 limited ones into the Gaza Strip.
– At least 80 Palestinian civilians, including 8 children, were arrested in the West Bank.
– 3 members of the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) were among those who were arrested.
– Offices of al-Zakat Committee in Tulkarm and Islamic Awqaf (endowments) Department in Qalqilia were raided.
· The Israeli forces continued to target Palestinian fishermen in the sea.
– 2 attacks were carried out against Palestinian fishing boats, but neither casualties nor material damage were reported.
· The Israeli forces continued to use excessive force against peaceful protests in the West Bank.
– A Palestinian child was wounded in Kofur Qaddoum weekly protest, northeast of Qalqilia.
· Israel has continued to impose a total closure on the oPt and has isolated the Gaza Strip from the outside world.
– The Israeli forces established dozens of checkpoints in the West Bank.
– At least 15 Palestinian civilians, including 2 children, a girl and a prisoner’s mother, were arrested at checkpoints.
– 2 brothers of these detainees were arrested at Beit Hanoun (Erez) crossing, north of the Gaza Strip.
· Israel continued efforts to create Jewish majority in the Occupied East Jerusalem
– 2 houses were demolished in Beit Hanina village, north of East Jerusalem, due to which, 5 families became homeless.
· The Israeli forces have continued settlement activities in the West Bank, and Israeli settlers have continued to attack Palestinian civilians and property.
– The Israeli forces issued more notices of house demolitions.
– The Israeli settlers set fire to 2 vehicles in Deir Jarir village, northeast of Ramallah.
– A settlement outpost was established on the lands of Jayous village in Qalqilia.
Summary
Israeli violations of international law and international humanitarian law in the oPt continued during the reporting period (31 January – 06 February 2013):
Shooting:
During the reporting period, the Israeli forces wounded 5 Palestinian civilians, including 4 children, in the West Bank and Gaza Strip; 3 of whom, including 2 children, were wounded in the West Bank, and 2 children were wounded in the Gaza Strip.
In the West Bank, on 02 February 2013, 2 Palestinian civilians, including a child, were wounded when the Israeli forces and settlers used force to disperse dozens of Palestinian civilians and activists, who gathered in Burin village, south of Nablus to establish a village on a land that was threatened to be seized for the interest of settlement expansion projects. Moreover, a 29-day old baby suffered from tear gas inhalation and medical sources described her condition as serious.
On the same day, a Palestinian child was hit by a tear gas canister to the chest when the Israeli forces opened fire at a peaceful protest that was organized by Kofur Qaddoum villagers, northeast of Qalqilia. This protest was organized to support Burin villagers, south of Nablus, who already started, with the help of local activists, establishing al-Manateer village on lands, which threatened to be seized for the interest of settlement expansion projects.
In the same context, the Israeli Forces continued to systematically use excessive force against peaceful protests organized by Palestinians and Israeli and international activists protesting against the annexation wall and settlement activities in the West Bank. As a result, dozens of Palestinians suffered from tear gas inhalation and sustained bruises.
In the Gaza Strip, on 01 February 2013, 2 Palestinian children were wounded when the Israeli forces positioned along the border fence, east of Abu Safiya area in the east of Jabalya, opened fire at a group of persons, who were few meters to the west of the border fence.
In the context of other shooting incidents, during the reporting period, 5 shooting incidents were carried out against Palestinian farmers and collectors of gravel, steel and firewood in the northern border area on 03, 04 and 05 February 2013.
In the context of targeting Palestinian fishermen in the sea, the Israeli gunboats stationed off al-Waha resort, northwest of Beit Lahia, opened fire heavily at the Palestinian fishing boats twice on 03 and 04 February 2013. In both incidents, neither casualties nor material damage were reported.
The full report is available online at:
Dorothy,
Perhaps this and the linked reflections will resonate with you as well . . .
Jenny Hartley
Northfield, MN
Subject: [Pal-Is list] Peace will come when…..
{From Churches for Middle East Peace, Jan 7th reflection} ..A message of hope.
Peace will come when laughter will float high in the skies of Jerusalem, when people will greet each other with a smile. According to Mother Teresa, “Peace starts with a smile.” In Jerusalem, people pass each other but do not see the other and unfortunately miss the divine image of God in the other.
Peace will come when we understand that Jerusalem does not belong to one group or another but that in Jerusalem God meets humanity to love and respect each other.
Peace will come when children are not taught to hate or fear, when they are free to learn, worship and enjoy all their national, social and economic rights.
Peace will come when we respect international law and implement justice with compassion.
Peace will come when there is joy, singing and sharing traditions and culture.
Peace will come when we learn to glorify the Creator, each in our own faith and tradition, enfolded between the protecting arms of the city that can hold us all.
This is the Jerusalem I dream of, when we shall see smiling faces that finally know that the things that make for peace are not impossible and that we are all invited to celebrate life.
– Nora Carmi is a Catholic Palestinian Christian who has served in various civil society organizations and is a resident East Jerusalem. You may read her reflection of March 29, 2011