| IOP Report {4} - January 2013 |
|
| Wednesday, 23 January 2013 | |
|
While Occupation and blockade are business as usual for Israel, there should be no business with Israel In Occupied Palestine Zionism in practice Israel’s Daily Toll on Palestinian Life, Limb, Liberty and Property (Compiled by Leslie Bravery, Palestine Human Rights Campaign POB 56150, Dominion Rd, Auckland, New Zealand www.palestine.org.nz) Economic sabotage: Gaza – the Israeli Navy continues to enforce a six-nautical-mile Gaza fishing limit. Recent news updates: A Rabbi's Path to Palestinian Solidarity (Truthout – Interview) "For me, the bottom line is this: the cornerstone value of my religious tradition commands me to stand in solidarity with all who are oppressed. It would thus be a profound betrayal of my own Jewish heritage if I consciously choose not to stand with the Palestinian people." http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/12009-a-rabbis-path-to-palestinian-solidarity The fifth column of American Zionists. The world needs to know that the fate of the USA – and given the USA's hyper-power status, the fate of the world – is in the hands of a small but extremely powerful fifth column of American Zionists, who are willing to bring America into a series of wars overseas and send thousands of its men and women to their deaths on behalf of ISRAEL's interests. Please watch the following link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apSkhUKw4W0 Jerusalem: E1 sector in the West Bank real estate deals benefit Jewish Israelis. UK-based Jewish film-maker Nimrod Kamer went to E1 sector in the West Bank and found out not only about settlement expansion but also the real estate deals that go with it. http://rt.com/news/israeli-settlements-west-bank-film-436/ Israeli forces shoot 19-year-old man in Gaza. http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=557944 Israel plans to complete annexation Wall around E1. http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=557926 Israel demolishes farm buildings and a well in south Hebron. http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=557876 The long road to Bab al-Karama. ISM, Bab al-Karama, Occupied Palestine, International Solidarity Movement, 20 January 2013. The road to Bab al-Karama, the new tent neighbourhood created by Palestinians on land that will be separated from the village of Beit Iksa by the Apartheid wall, exposes a landscape of Apartheid. To reach Bab al-Karama from Occupied Ramallah one needs to take the segregated road for Palestinians that runs under the segregated Israeli 443 Highway between Ramallah and Beir Naballah. http://palsolidarity.org/2013/01/the-long-road-to-bab-al-karama/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For Palestinians, Israeli elections signal deepening occupation By Dr Hanan Ashrawi Haaretz 21 January 2013 http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/for-palestinians-israeli-elections-signal-deepening-occupation.premium-1.495169 Over and again, the Palestinian leadership has been asked: What are our expectations of the Israeli elections? Our answer: Peace is nowhere in sight. Predictably, over the past few weeks Israeli and foreign media have been hounding us for our expectations of the Israeli elections, and whether there will be any chance of a future breakthrough. Our answer is that the likely outcome does not bode well for the chances of peace. It is just a matter of reviewing the platforms of the various Israeli political parties: Almost every single Zionist party has promised to continue with the policies of colonial expansion, to tighten the isolation of Occupied East Jerusalem from the rest of Palestine, and to focus on “managing” the occupation rather than on making peace. This formula is a sure recipe for disaster for both Israelis and Palestinians. Most Israeli political parties have simply chosen to ignore the fact that they have systemically denied the Palestinian people their most basic rights. It is Israel that occupies four million people in the State of Palestine. It is Israel that has condemned more than five million Palestinians to exile. It is the Israeli occupation of Palestine that constitutes the main source of violence and instability in the region. Justice seems to have no meaning in the Israeli political lexicon unless it is in relation to Israeli Jewish citizens. This fact can be attested to by the 1.5 million Christian and Muslim Palestinians who hold Israeli citizenship and yet face institutionalised discrimination within Israel itself. Incitement against Palestinians is on the rise. This culture of hate and exclusion is demonstrably evident throughout most of the Israeli electoral campaigns. An Israeli candidate calls for blowing up the Al Aqsa Mosque in Occupied East Jerusalem and then simply justifies it by saying that it was a “joke.” http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/anglo-file/u-s-born-knesset-candidate-jeremy-gimpel-and-his-dome-of-the-rock-joke.premium-1.494616 Is it like those “jokes” carried out by Israeli terrorists against Muslim and Christian holy sites in Palestine over the course of 2012? One member of a party advocates a policy offering financial incentives for Palestinians to emigrate, as a way to achieve an overall goal of ethnic cleansing in Palestine. Nothing seems to change. Some of the party heads have campaigned in settlements on the promise that the settlements will never be removed, although they are all illegal under international law. At the same time, they cheer when Israeli occupation forces remove Palestinians from their own land, either by stripping them of residency rights or by using force against courageous non-violent activists who have rightfully decided to protect their land from Israeli colonialism through establishing new Palestinian villages such as Bab Al Shams and Bab Al Karama. Forty-five years of Israeli occupation and colonisation of another nation have taken their toll on the Israeli public. Despite the conventional wisdom that there is support for a two-state solution among Israelis, it is precisely this public that is being drawn into voting for those who offer a regional war agenda rather than a regional peace agenda. In many elections, politicians are accused of stealing public resources. In Israel, in addition to stealing Palestinian land and natural resources, most Israeli politicians are bent on confiscating the last hope for a two-state solution. Most Israeli political parties are guilty of the deliberate omission of peace from their agenda. They talk about negotiations when they mean dictation. They talk about “managing” the occupation rather than putting an end to it. While there is a global consensus for a two-state solution, the main Israeli electoral lists see no room in historic Palestine for two states. This is despite over 60 UN resolutions, international humanitarian law and the most basic moral imperatives. Unlike some Israeli politicians, we do not interfere in the elections of other countries. We accept the democratic choice of the people, even though in this case the outcome has a direct impact on our lives. Some Israeli politicians use the power of the occupier to undermine Palestinian rights and the chances of peace by creating an apartheid system and by trading away Palestinian rights. Sooner or later the Israeli public should come to the realisation that the longevity, security and legitimacy of their state are dependent on their treatment of the Palestinian people and their commitment to peace and justice, not to the subjugation of a whole nation. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dr Hanan Ashrawi is a member of the PLO Executive Committee. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Why all Americans should care about the Holy Land Foundation case By Stephen Downs and Kathy Manley In 2008, five directors of the Holy Land Foundation, formerly the largest Muslim charity in the US, were convicted on charges of material support for terrorism—essentially for feeding the poor and for building schools and hospitals in Palestine. Although none of the defendants were accused of violence or even encouraging violence, some of them received sentences of up to 65 years and are incarcerated in mostly Muslim isolation prisons. At their first trial in 2007, the government conceded that no foundation money had gone to any terrorist organisations; rather, some money went to the same zakat (charity) committees in Palestine that the US Agency for International Development (USAID), the UN, the Red Crescent and many NGOs used to distribute aid to the Palestinian community during the same period. The zakat committees were not designated as terrorist organisations, and no practical way existed to distribute aid except through these committees, which is why other charities and the US government itself used them. The first trial ended with a hung jury, without a single conviction on any count, and with some outright acquittals. At the second trial, the government called an "anonymous expert" to testify that some of these zakat committees were "controlled" in part by Hamas—a designated terrorist organisation but also, since January 2006, Palestine's lawfully elected government. The US government claimed that channelling the Foundation's charitable activities through these "controlled" committees helped raise the prestige of Hamas and thus constituted material support for terrorism. A known expert can be cross-examined by the defence and shown to be ignorant about the subject, but an "anonymous expert" cannot be challenged because he is unknown—he could be a man off the street, or the prosecutor's brother. By definition, an expert must have a public identity that establishes the claimed expertise. The 6th Amendment to the US Constitution guarantees the right to confront (cross-examine) the witnesses against the defendant. Anonymous expert witnesses violate this fundamental principle. Yet on the basis of this anonymous "expert" opinion, all the defendants were convicted at the second trial. On 29 October 2012, the US Supreme Court refused to hear the Holy Land Five's appeals and let stand the criminalising of charitable intent using the opinion of an anonymous expert to do so. Well, one may say, injustices are everywhere. Why should I care about this particular case? The reason goes back to a 2010 Supreme Court case, Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, which involved two groups that sued the government to determine if merely giving advice to a designated terrorist organisation on how to stop engaging in terrorism would constitute material support. The Court held that it would, because even advice on how to live peacefully was material support. Under this ruling, then, co-ordinated free speech, peacemaking, charitable activities and social hospitality could all constitute material support, even if the defendant did not intend to engage in terrorism and in fact opposed it. The plaintiffs in the original Humanitarian case (as opposed to the Supreme Court appeal) argued that the government should have to prove that a person intended to engage in terrorism—otherwise, anyone (like the directors of the Holy Land Foundation) could be convicted of terrorism without even realising that he or she was doing anything wrong; due process requires that criminal laws give fair notice as to what conduct is prohibited. The Supreme Court disagreed with this argument, saying it was absolutely clear what is prohibited. The secretary of state publishes a list of designated terrorist organisations: just avoid all contact with organisations on the list, and no one will violate the law. But that is exactly what the Holy Land Foundation directors did: they avoided providing aid to any designated terrorist organisation on the list. On their own and through a former congressman, they even repeatedly asked the State Department and the Department of Justice for guidance on where they should and should not send their humanitarian aid. But the government refused to provide any guidance other than to refer them to the State Department list—which did not include the zakat committees. Yet by dealing with these committees, which were not on the list, the directors were found to have violated the law anyway, in direct contradiction to the Supreme Court's holding in the Humanitarian case. By refusing to review the case, the Supreme Court signalled that due process no longer requires fair notice of prohibited conduct. Legal transactions could now be made criminal by discovering "associations" that were previously unknown to the parties involved. Moreover, the government could establish these "associations" by anonymous experts—mouthpieces for the government—that could not be confronted or cross-examined within the meaning of the 6th Amendment. The implications are enormous. The government can now criminalise political, religious and social ideology and speech. Donating to peace groups, participating in protests, attending church, mosque or synagogue, entertaining friends, and posting material on the Internet, for example, could later be found to be illegal because of "associations," manufactured by anonymous experts, which in some way supposedly supported designated terrorist organisations one has never heard of. In this decade during which our civil liberties have steadily eroded, Americans have seen their government claim, under the National Defence Authorisation Act (NDAA), the right to hold citizens without charges indefinitely, and we've seen the president of the United States claim the right to assassinate American citizens anywhere in the world without due process by using a presidential "kill list." Now the government can convict any American of terrorism crimes he or she was not even aware of committing—based on information provided by an "anonymous expert" who can be neither challenged nor confronted. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Stephen Downs retired in 2003 as chief attorney with the NY State Commission on Judicial Conduct. In 2006, he volunteered as part of the defence team in US v. Yassin Aref. He is a member of the Muslim Solidarity Committee and Project SALAM, and executive director of the National Coalition to Protect Civil Freedoms (NCPCF). Kathy Manley is an Albany, NY criminal defence attorney and one of Aref's attorneys. She is also a member of the Muslim Solidarity Committee, Project SALAM, the NCPCF and the NY Civil Liberties Union. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Further news sources Ali Kazak's newsletter Today in Palestine contains many news summaries that include both armed and non-violent methods of resistance to the Occupation. The newsletter also contains much other useful reporting. This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it For more news see: Today in Palestine! www.groups.yahoo.com/group/f_shadi ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Behind the Wall Rich Wiles is a photographic artist who has been living and working in Palestine for some years. His photographic work has been shown around Europe, the US, Australia and in Palestine itself. Since 2006 he has been writing from Occupied Palestine under the title Behind the Wall. Much of this work is based in and around the refugee camps in Palestine, highlighting daily life and memories of refugees who still live in forced exile for over 60 years since Al Nakba (The Catastrophe). www.richwiles.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ See this In Occupied Palestine Report at: the PHRC website: www.palestine.org.nz - and you can check out previous editions by clicking on In Occupied Palestine listed under Contents ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Stop the Violence Coalition Stop the Violence is a coalition aimed at fighting against Israeli violence and crimes all over the world. The purpose of the coalition is to co-ordinate the efforts of groups and individuals working to protest against the historic and continuing oppression of Palestinian people by the Israeli regime. Our coalition is an independent and non-profit organisation, based in Europe, which was formed as part of a global movement against Israeli apartheid. We can also provide the latest news, articles, photos, events and petitions. Contact: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ If you have friends who would also like to receive these newsletters, please ask them to contact us at This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it |