The first, about Abu Rahmeh’s incarceration being extended, opens with an intro by me about brainwashing—that is to say, about how Israelis and others are brainwashed by the way news is presented in the press.
In item 2 Amira Hass argues that not the soldiers alone but the higher brass—military and government—should stand accused. I agree. But this, in my opinion, does not excuse soldiers of doing wrong. True, they are brain washed, and believe that they are doing right. But the argument in the Nuremberg trials and in Eichman’s trial here is that claiming that one was merely obeying orders does not excuse one from guilt. Nor do I believe that Hass means to imply that it does. But because she is not absolutely clear on this I feel it necessary to make the point.
Item 3. “The Demasking Law,” argues that the fascist bills before the Knesset reveal Israel for what it is, and, that as a result other countries will recognize Israel as being fascist and will act on it. I agree thoroughly with the central argument, that is about what Israel is. I have long insisted that in principle there is no difference between a pure Aryan state and a pure Jewish one (or for that matter between any ‘pure’ single religion or single ethnicity or single racial state)—the differences come in the means that a state employs to maintain its demographic purity.
Hopefully the author is right about the end result. I am skeptical about the world. Just look at how the Western powers react to Durbin (item 5). These powers, or 8 of them, stated loudly and clearly of the 2008-09 Gaza debacle that ‘Israel has a right to defend itself.’ But if we can move bds sufficiently, and especially get banks to stop working with Israel, then we might indeed see a change that would benefit not only Palestinians but also Israelis.
Item 4 reveals that notwithstanding Israel’s crocodile tears shed over a quarter of its scientists being abroad, it does not do what is necessary to bring them home—i.e., create jobs for them. No money? Well Israel certainly has enough to pour into colonization in the OPT. Just check out the figures of how many new structures and roads are under construction there. Since actions speak louder than words, it would seem that Israel has enough scientists without bringing those abroad home.
Item 5 relates that most Western powers (not to be confused with the term used, i.e., ‘democratic’) either voted against or abstained from voting on commemorating the Durban 2001 anti-racism conference, which (among other things) was critical of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and likened Zionism to racism. Israel and the US walked out of the conference, as might be expected. Still, the fact that 121 countries voted for the commemoration should not be ignored, no matter how much Israel and its allies wish things to be otherwise. Moreover, that the US and other Western powers claim that Israel is not racist is politically motivated. It is not reality. Anyone who has read materials that I have sent just this year alone has had more than sufficient proof that Israel was and remains racist.
I apologize for being somewhat rougher in my tone tonight than usual, but I truly am furious about Abu Rahmeh, the brain washing (by no means new), and so much else that is happening here. Shouldn’t take out my frustration on you. Tomorrow will be better. Maybe.
All the best,
Dorothy
===================================
1.Item 1 is a clear example of brain washing, be that the intention of the reporters or not. Most likely the material was furnished by the IOF spokesperson. Take the statement “The protests often turn violent”—true, but not as the report claims because of rock throwing by protesters. Rather, the violence is normally begun by IOF soldiers and/or border police against the demonstrators. I am of course sorry for anyone who is injured or killed, but soldiers shouldn’t be stealing land if they do not wish to be injured.
Moreover, during all the years of demonstrations in various villages, so far as I recall, but a single IOF soldier lost an eye due to rock throwing, whereas 20 or more Palestinians have lost lives in demonstrations due to IOF use of live ammunition or other weapons; other demonstrators, including Israeli and international, have been injured, e.g., Yonathan Pollack (tear gas canister to the head, which left him with serious injuries), Matan Cohen (rubber bullet in his eye), Tristan Anderson (hit in head by tear-gas canister shot from close range, resulting in serious brain damage), a lawyer (whose name I don’t recall) shot in the back of the head with rubber bullet while walking away from the demonstration, Emily Hanochwicz, who lost an eye when struck by a tear gas canister shot at close range, not to mention other killings and injuries of activists in incidents not related to demonstrations against the route of the wall–as Rachel Corrie, Tom Hurendall (both in Gaza), and the injuries of Brian Avery, shot directly in his face, which as a result was badly deformed, , and more, many more instances of injuries and deaths by civilians due to IOF violence.
This list is far from complete, but is sufficient to give you some idea of what activists face vs what Israeli soldiers armed to the hilt face.
Another brain washing phrase is to claim that the protests are against the wall/fence. And to claim that it is a security measure. Nonsense! The protests are not against the wall but against its route, designed to steal as much Palestinian land as possible, and in the process uproot 1000s of trees. Furthermore, it, like checkpoints, is not a security measure. Numerous Palestinians without permits sneak into Israel to look for work or to go to jobs they already have (from time to time the new reports that 20 or 50 or 10 were caught trying to enter illegally). Any Palestinian who wanted to blow him/herself up in Israel would be an idiot to go through a checkpoint, since everyone knows that Palestinians are thoroughly searched, and since there are other means of entering Israel.]
—–
Haaretz,
November 24, 2010
Detention of Palestinian anti-separation fence activist extended
Abdullah Abu-Rahmeh, who led weekly demonstrations against fence in village of Bil’in, was incarcerated for incitement.
The Israeli military has confirmed it is extending the detention of a prominent Palestinian activist, saying it believes he will resume leading violent demonstrations if he is freed.
Abdullah Abu-Rahmeh had been scheduled to be released this week after spending almost a year in prison on a conviction of incitement.
But the army said Tuesday that a military court has ordered him to remain behind bars until authorities decide on a request by prosecutors to lengthen his sentence. A court date hasn’t been set for the appeal. [my emphasis, D]
Abu-Rahmeh led weekly demonstrations in the West Bank village of Bil’in against Israel’s separation barrier for the past five years. The protests often turn violent with protesters throwing rocks at soldiers, who in turn fire tear gas and sometimes rubber bullets in efforts to contain the crowd.
The village of Bil’in has become the symbol of the struggle against the separation fence, serving as the site of dozens of joint Palestinian-Israeli demonstrations in recent years.
The European Union has criticized Abu-Rahmeh’s conviction as a violation of free speech.
In a strongly worded statement, the EU’s Catherine Ashton said she was deeply concerned by the guilty verdict against Abu-Rahmeh.
“The EU sees the barrier’s route as illegal and views Abu-Rahmeh as a human rights defender committed to nonviolent protest,” Ashton said.
Ashton suggested the conviction was intended to prevent him and other Palestinians from exercising their legitimate right to protest against the existence of the separation barriers in a nonviolent manner.
==============================
2. Haaretz,
November 24, 2010
IDF generals, not just soldiers, must answer questions on human shields
The Givati soldiers’ conviction essentially handed the post of chief of staff to Yoav Galant and bestowed legal immunity on political figures, in particular Ehud Olmert and Ehud Barak.
The Givati Brigade soldiers who were tried and convicted of risking the life of a non-combatant Palestinian child are entitled to feel like victims. But why shouldn’t they feel patriotic pride? Their conviction essentially handed the post of chief of staff to Yoav Galant and bestowed legal immunity on political figures, in particular Ehud Olmert and Ehud Barak.
They were just small cogs who were brainwashed about the might of the enemy. Look at the statements other soldiers made to the organization Breaking the Silence; some of them quickly realized their commanders had filled them with lies before the ground offensive on the Gaza Strip on January 3, 2009. But even if the two convicted Givati soldiers had the maturity and judgment to realize this wasn’t the heroic struggle for which they had been prepared, it’s clear they acted out of fear when they ordered a 9-year-old boy to open bags. They grew up in an atmosphere that one could do anything to the Palestinians in Gaza. They didn’t come up with that approach – they’re the lower rank soldiers that the system put under the spotlight.
Unlike a soldier who stole a credit card and went to jail, these two did not have to serve time. Their peers, who demonstrated on their behalf, must know: They weren’t the only ones who at gunpoint used civilians for military purposes. This practice was prevalent in the Golani Brigade. Civilians were bound, blindfolded and exposed to the cold so they could serve as human shields for soldiers in huge trenches and in houses that were turned into lookout points and from which soldiers opened fire. This was not the whim of an isolated few. There were soldiers who fired directly on civilians bearing white flags. On their commanders’ orders, soldiers prevented Palestinian rescue teams from reaching the wounded, so an unknown number of people, including children, bled to death. The multiplicity of similar incidents shows that the soldiers were acting in accordance with uniform guidelines.
Internal military investigations tend to focus on the individual soldiers who took part in the ground offensive. But most of the Palestinian civilians killed by the Israel Defense Forces were killed as a result of computerized fire from afar, whether from the air, the sea or land. Children on the roofs of their homes were killed in just these kinds of deadly video games – by the push of a button pressed by our anonymous warriors, who will not be brought to justice.
Col. Ilan Malka, the commander of the Givati Brigade, appears to be the highest-ranking officer questioned by military investigators, due to his order to shell, from the air, a home to which his own soldiers had brought 100 civilians. The order was based on his interpretation of images received by a drone. But it is not Malka who came up with the instruction that any Palestinian caught by a drone, engaged in civilian activities like speaking on a cell phone near a window, baking bread in the yard, looking for water or riding a bike, is a suspect to be killed. That’s why so many civilians were killed; they were hit by rockets fired from the air, not because they were caught up in a battle on the ground. It wasn’t Malka who came up with the cult of military high-tech or its depiction as a tool that’s never wrong. This cult greases the wheels of Israeli propaganda, which dismisses as a lie any Palestinian report of civilian deaths.
Malka is also not responsible for the concept that Israel must use force several times more deadly than the weapons the Palestinians have. So more civilians than armed combatants were killed? That’s their problem.
When one or two soldiers are tried, it’s easy for the military establishment to argue these are isolated exceptions whose actions are contrary to the spirit of the IDF. But the military establishment functions under the influence and authority of the civil establishment. Israeli society, for the most part, is indifferent to the killing of non-Jewish civilians. It supports the use of disproportionate force and is not interested in investigating all the incidents resulting in the deaths of Palestinian civilians. In such an investigation the incriminating evidence leads straight to the highest levels of Israel’s military and political establishment.
=============================
3. Forwarded by Ed Corrigan
Excellent article on Fascism in Israel. Translated from Hebrew by
journalist Lia Tarachansky. I have corrected a few minor typos. The
Demasking Law, by Hanan Hever, Haaretz, November 18, 2010. I received
this article from Independent Jewish Voices (Canada). It should be
republished in Occupation Magazine.
Ed Corrigan
———–
Please forgive my poor translation skills…
Hanan Hever is the father of Shir Hever, who wrote the monumental book
The Political Economy of the Israeli Occupation.
Lia Tarachansky
Original in Hebrew: http://www.haaretz.co.il/hasite/spages/1198191.html
Hanan Hever I The Demasking Law
The Loyalty oath law supports the stance of all the Zionist parties; It
demasks the take over of fascism in Israel.
The new citizenship law is a good law. According to the latest trends,
it works in the interests of Israel. First of all, it makes clear the
state of affairs in the country, that in the past year or rather since
the summer of 2010, the country’s fascist side strengthens. It will
increase the international pressure on Israel and it looks like it may
be the only thing that can rescue Israel from the current bleak state of
affairs.
In essence, we aren’t talking about a revolutionary law. It doesn’t
stand in opposition to the declaration of independence, rather it
ratifies it. It is also not opposed to the position of all the Zionist
parties. And hence, when the host of the Army Radio evening show, Yaron
Velinsky tried to gather from Tzipi Livni (as from other opponents) why
she opposes the law he got only verbal acrobatics.
Even Ehud Barak attempted to add to the Loyalty Oath the declaration of
independence, he did not differ from Avigdor Lieberman, and certainly not
from Benjamin Netanyahu. He only strengthened the tight connection between
the law and the declaration of independence. And indeed all the Zionist parties,
including SHAS, revolve around the contradictory model of a “Jewish and
democratic state”, when it is obvious that the country being Jewish must
come at the expense of it being democratic.
Jewishness, that is race and ethnicity as outlined in religion, is an
essential element to receiving equal rights in Israel. That means that
the new law makes clear to non-Jews who wish to join that they will be
doing so as inferior tenants and that the Jewish Israeli society is
built on the basis of religious purity of blood, or strict religious
practice. Therefore, Israel, despite its statements, is essentially a
Jewish nation and is not democratic. It is one who occupies another
nation while discriminating against its Arab citizens.
In fact, most of the parties agree to this. Therefore the difference
between them and Lieberman is only in that he does what they appear to
suppress but in essence, and with a wink, approve. That is, they don’t
object but prefer to hide behind a mask of democracy. So Minister
Yitzhak Herzog’s opposition to the law isn’t opposition to the
disastrous concept of a “Jewish and democratic” country, but opposition
to the concept being openly revealed.
All this also explains why fascism will and is already coming here. The
basis of democracy is gone, among others due to the laws of emergency;
because of the break in legitimacy of an active and critical
parliamentary system; populism, nationalism, and xenophobia towards
minorities; the making of an all-purpose government and an all out war
against anyone who undermines the country’s founding myth – are the core
of fascism here. The new law suggests, like fascism, a vision of
totalitarian revival of ethnic nationalism.
Lieberman reads the political map clearly and understands that the
Zioinist parties will not be able to stop the process of suppressing
democracy for ethnicity. But that they support his bending of democracy
for Jewish ethnocentrism. Netanyahu, it seems, won’t be taking a strong
position and then it will only take the foreseeable economic crisis for
Lieberman to come out as the leader of an Israeli fascism.
The only hope to stopping fascism won’t come from within. The weakening
of liberal and democratic forces, trapped in the grip of their
theological commitment to the Jewishness of the nation, is the first
sign. In fact, examples in 20th century of fascism actually being
stopped from within rather than from external war are rare. Therefore as
the fascist face of the nation is unmasked more, the external forces
will grow, whether through the growing economic boycott or by other
means. So the Loyalty Oath law and the string of laws that will come
after it (the Nakba Law, the Boycott Law, and others), will only
strengthen the international pressure on Israel and only then, maybe,
salvation will come.
Hanan Hever is a professor of Hebrew literature and the Hebrew University.
===========================
4. Ynet,
November 24, 2010
Returning academics: No room for us here
Israeli scientists working abroad yearn to return home, but without sufficient funding, shortage of academic positions, and absorption issues this dream seems out of reach
Is a lack of funding fueling the brain drain? Dr. Korenblit Sivan is one of 25 scientists returning to Israel after working for Ivy League universities out west, who have now returned to work at Israeli research centers.
“Five new positions have opened up at the Life Sciences Faculty in the Bar-Ilan University,” she said, addressing Education Minister Gideon Sa’ar. “Eighty Israeli scientists jumped at the opportunity. They all wanted to return home. Five were picked, and 75 remained abroad. As you can see, the issue isn’t the Israeli scientists’ unwillingness to return, but rather the lack of funding to bring them here.”
The education minister listened thoughtfully. He wrote down what she said in great detail and announced his intention to hold a personal meeting with the Education Ministry’s director general to discuss the issue.
The good news that came out of the conference for returning scientists held on Monday in Jerusalem was that Israel is still an attractive country in the eyes of researchers, who are otherwise very successful abroad. Most of the Israeli scientists working in Ivy League universities in the United States yearn to come back home and work at Israeli universities.
But this is just wishful thinking. The bad news is that almost all of them remain abroad. Only a small percentage of Israeli scientists working and studying abroad make it back to Israel.
With the current budgets, even after additional budget increases for this specific purpose, the Israeli academy can only take in so many of them. So instead of enriching the Israeli universities with thousands of researchers and lecturers that can lead Israel to great academic achievements – most Israeli scientists working overseas are forced to stay where they are.
About 25% of Israeli scientists work abroad. “This is the highest percentage in the world,” emphasizes Professor Manuel Trachtenberg, head of the budget and planning committee for higher education. “There is no other country in the world where a quarter of its scientists have left to work somewhere else. Canada is in second place with 12%, and they share a border with the US.”
So what is the Education Ministry doing about it? “The plan is to add 2,000 lecturer positions at universities in the next six years,” Trachtenberg says. “Within five years there will be an estimated 30% increase in positions for researchers and scientists. This year the universities received an additional NIS 620 million (roughly $170 million). Next year they will get another NIS 450 million (about $123 million), and so on in the coming years.”
Absorption Difficulties
In this week’s conference, held near the Presidential Residence in Jerusalem, 25 Israeli scientists, who returned home after a few years abroad and were successful in finding a job in Israel, were presented to the audience.
========================
5. Jerusalem Post,
November 24, 2010
Photo by: ASSOCIATED PRESS
UN General Assembly votes to commemorate Durban conference
Overwhelming majority of 121 to 19 countries vote in favor of commemorating the controversial anti-racism conference of 2001; Israel, US, Germany, Canada vote against; FM spokesman calls result “unfortunate.”
The United Nations General Assembly, in a vote of 121 for to 19 against late Tuesday night, voted to commemorate the anti-racism Durban conference of 2001 at next year’s General Assembly meeting in New York. Thirty-five countries abstained from the vote.
Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor responded to the vote by saying that it was “unfortunate there are those who want to deflect from the fight on racism for anti-Israeli propaganda purposes.” By so doing, he said, they were “harming the real struggle” against racism.
Palmor noted that most of the world’s democratic countries either voted against the resolution, or abstained.
Officially known as the World Conference against Racism 2001, Durban I was marred by dramatic displays of anti-Semitism and attacks on Israel’s right to exist. Last year’s Durban II showcased Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s tirades against Israel as well as his denial of the Holocaust.
Among those voting against the intended commemoration were Israel, the United States, Italy, Australia, Germany, Canada, Sweden, the Netherlands, Poland and Romania.
The United States, in a statement by Deputy Representative to ECOSOC John Sammis, expressed its disapproval of the commemoration in an accompanying explanation to its “no” vote.
“My delegation regrets that this resolution contains elements that require us to vote no, and we hope to work together to find common ground on concrete approaches that both protect freedom of expression and combat all forms of racism and racial discrimination,” Sammis said, adding that the US is “deeply troubled by the choice of time and venue for the 10th anniversary commemorative event.”
“Just days earlier, we will have honored the victims of 9/11, whose loved ones will be marking a solemn 10-year anniversary for them and the entire nation,” Sammis said.
“It will be an especially sensitive time for the people of New York and a repeat of the vitriol sadly experienced at past Durban-related events risks undermining the relationship we have worked hard to strengthen over the past few years between the United States and the UN.”
Fiamma Nirenstein, writing for the Italian newspaper Il Giornale, wrote Monday of her memories of covering the initial Durban conference.
“Those were just the days before the attack on the Twin Towers and never was a hate scenario better laid,” Nirenstein wrote. “Durban was the premise to Ground Zero. While from the podium speakers heaped on the US and Israel all the sins of the world and demanded that they pay the penalty, Jews wearing kippahs had to protect themselves against the demonstrators touting portraits of Bin Laden (which at the time I saw and reported on) and hounding the Jews.”
Recalling that Jewish centers in Durban were stormed and closed, and that an Israeli press conference was violently interrupted, Nirenstein wrote that Israel was compared to Nazism and accused of apartheid at Durban, while it was demanded that Americans “handsomely recompense Africa for damages from slavery.”
“The Durban declaration that they now want to resurrect and celebrate again singles out Israel as a racist state, without naming any other country in the world,” Nirenstein wrote. “The myriad types of ethnic and religious discrimination that infest the world, for the declaration, does not exist and it doesn’t even say a word about the thousands of massacres that have bloodied the globe for reasons of the color of one’s skin or beliefs.”
“Re-approving the Durban document means rekindling, with the elephantine power of the UN General Assembly, a whole series of institutional initiatives giving rise to cultural and economic boycotts, discrimination against athletes, artists and scholars and proliferating the accusations of war crimes to any Israeli official in sight,” Nirenstein concluded. “It means reviving manifestations of hate in which the swastika and the Star of David overlap and the hunting season on Jews is declared open, the result being an exponential growth in anti-Semitic incidents. This makes many people happy, very happy.”
