Archive | June, 2010

A.LOEWENSTEIN ONLINE NEWSLETTER

NOVANEWS


Palestinian “leader” begs Zionists to be nice

 30 Jun 2010

The delusion of the colonised. Please sir – the ones who have spent their entire lives demonising, killing and occupying us – please treat my people well. God help the Palestinians under Mahmoud Abbas:

The Palestinians have long feared the Jewish lobby in Washington. Now, they are embracing it.

During a swing through the U.S. capital this month, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas was the guest of honor at a dinner with a small but influential gathering of more than 30 Jewish American leaders and political heavyweights. In what participants on both sides have described as a highly successful meeting, Abbas patiently fielded questions for more than 90 minutes, discussing such touchy topics as Mideast peace talks, anti-Israeli incitement in the Palestinian media, violence and terrorism and the Holocaust.

It was a dramatic departure for the Palestinians, who have traditionally viewed the American Jewish leadership with a mixture of awe, animosity and envy for its political skills and influence over what is seen as a pro-Israel U.S. policy.

Palestinian officials say it was the first time Abbas has met with such a large and diverse group of Jewish leaders, and reflected a realization that courting American Jews could benefit the Palestinians.

“I think it’s a mistake to ignore these institutions and communities by saying that they are against us, and that we should not talk to them,” Abbas told The Associated Press. “No, we should sit with them, and we should try to convince them by talking to them.”

 

Neo-cons dare to speak about failed states

 30 Jun 2010

There is something pretty wrong about framing countries as “failed states” and ripe for photo shoots, but that’s what Foreign Policy has done. Places like Somalia, Yemen, Iraq and Afghanistan are on the list and it seems that the magazine has taken a perverse pleasure in doing so.

And what kind of credibility does a publication have when it asks Paul Wolfowitz, a key architect of the Iraq war, to comment? Are we supposed to take his thoughts seriously?

 

Israeli hack talks of Iranian armageddon

 30 Jun 2010

What’s the role of the corporate media? To provide a space for Zionist propagandists to spread lies about the “threats” in the region:

In an interview in his office Tuesday, Israel’s ambassador to the United States warned that Iran might unleash a wave of terrorist violence in the Middle East in retaliation for the tough new sanctions that passed the U.S. Congress last week.

“What better way to divert attention from a sanctions regime than by starting another Middle East war?” the ambassador, historian and author Michael Oren, asked. Iran might respond to severe restrictions on its ability to buy gasoline and finance its state-owned companies by returning to the negotiating table, or use its connections to Hezbollah and Hamas to fight back by having those groups attack Israel and perhaps others, Oren said.

“The next step is not to fall into that trap,” Oren said, arguing that the international community shouldn’t be deterred from enforcing the sanctions. The question would then be who can hold out longer, the international community-or the regime in Tehran.

The sanctions might work to convince Iranian leaders to change their calculus over their nuclear program, if the energy measures are enforced, Oren said. The test of whether the sanctions are having an effect will be if the Iranian regime reacts, either by coming back to the negotiating table or waging a proxy war on Israel or the West.

CIA Director Leon Panetta said Sunday that Iran was likely two years away from having a nuclear weapon. Without getting into specifics, Oren said Israeli estimates “dovetail” with U.S. intelligence conclusions, but that Israel believes that Iran has made the decision to weaponize nuclear material, while U.S. officials have only concluded that Tehran is on that path.

He said he did not believe that the Obama administration was meeting in any way with Hamas, as some in the militant group have reportedly claimed. Oren said that no one should deal with Hamas, which he called a “genocidal, racist organization.”

Iran and Hamas will be near the top of the agenda next week when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu comes to Washington. On July 6, Netanyahu will meet with Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and Defense Secretary Robert GatesHillary Clinton will still be on her Europe trip. before moving on to New York. Secretary of State

One key aim of the short visit will be to show that the U.S.-Israel relationship is healthy and that the White House isn’t avoiding a public embrace of the Israeli government.

“There will be a big public component of this trip that will remove any perception of snubbery,” Oren said. “There’s going to be a lot of photographers,” he joked, referring to the fact that at the last Obama-Netanyahu meeting, no pictures were ever taken — and the two leaders’ conversation was widely reported to be tense and unproductive.

A shift, not a rift

Oren also responded to reports that he told a private group that U.S.-Israel relations were “are in a state of tectonic rift in which continents are drifting apart.”

He acknowledged that the U.S. approach to Israel had changed since President Obama took office, but said that it has both positive and negative consequences for an Israel that is adapting to the new atmosphere.

“The Obama administration is not a status-quo administration; it came in with a policy of change,” Oren said. “It’s not headed in a direction of abandonment, it’s a shift and our job is to figure where that shift is going and how to adapt.”

He also predicted that as the Obama administration gets more experience in dealing with Middle East politics, it will slowly but surely come back around to agreeing with more and more of Israel’s positions.

“My working assumption is that any encounter by American policymakers with Middle East realities almost invariably redounds to Israel’s favor,” he said.

Oren pushed back at reports that senior Obama administration officials are all over the map on Israel policy. The conventional wisdom pits National Security Advisor Jim Jones and U.S. ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice as advocating a tougher line, while Biden and the National Security Council’s Dennis Ross are said to be more inclined toward the Israeli position. According to Oren, in private communications, the messages are all identical.

Oren’s real worry is not the White House, but Democrats in Congress. “My deep concern is that American support of Israel will become a partisan issue,” he said, referring to a Jan. 26 letter urging Israel to ease the Gaza blockage that was signed by 54 Democrats and zero Republicans.

He also said that statements from Democrats immediately after the flotilla incident were often harsher on Israel than Republican ones.

What’s next for Gaza

Meanwhile, the Obama administration is still seeking further “adjustments” in Israel’s Gaza blockade, Oren said, including opening additional border crossings, giving a greater role to the Palestinian Authority, and adding international observers, perhaps from the European Union.

Israel would love to see more of a Palestinian Authority presence in Gaza, but opening another crossing or adding EU monitors is dangerous, he warned.

“We’ve had EU observers there before. Hamas threatened them, and they ran away,” Oren said. “If you send them to Gaza, they’re likely to get killed.”

Oren said the Gaza blockade was not just vital to Israel’s security, but vital for the pursuit of a two-state solution as well.

“Once you open up the sea lanes to Gaza, that spells the end of the peace process,” he said.

He defended the Israeli-led investigation into the Gaza flotilla incident as a “South Korea-style investigation” on a smaller scale, referring to the international team that, in conjunction with South Korean experts, determined that Pyongyang was responsible for sinking a South Korean naval vessel.

Oren said the Israeli government has no idea if U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon will launch or support a new international investigation on top of the Israeli probe. He also said he has never asked, nor has he been told, whether the Obama administration would vigorously oppose such an investigation if and when it surfaces.

“Why make an issue of something that’s not even happening as far as we know?” Oren said, explaining Israeli thinking on the subject. “To the best of our knowledge, the U.S. is saying that our investigation fulfills the request for transparency and international participation.”

 

Can somebody tell them that slamming Islam isn’t great for Zionist spin

 30 Jun 2010

Remember Latma, the Zionist outfit in Israel run by the Jerusalem Post’s Caroline Glick?

You know the ones. Hating Arabs and Palestinians in particular. Doing wonders for Israeli PR.

They’re back with another tasteful affair:

How close is BP with Obama?

 30 Jun 2010

Dahr Jamail is one of America’s finest independent reporters.

He’s currently investigating the devastating effects of the BP oil spill:

I learn that due to a combination of part of the Mississippi River having been diverted (thus stopping the natural regeneration of land from silt deposits), oyster beds being depleted in the past, oil-production infrastructure causing erosion of wetlands, and now oil from the new disaster destroying marshlands, the Cajun coast is the fastest disappearing landmass on Earth. In fact, every 30-minutes sees an area the size of a football field disappear into the Gulf of Mexico.

 

Sydney Greens forum on Israel/Palestine

 29 Jun 2010

 

The rise and rise and rise of BDS

 29 Jun 2010

The following statement has been released:

The Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI), established in April 2004 by a small group of Palestinian academics and intellectuals and widely supported by leading civil society associations, unions and networks,[1] has not witnessed a sustained surge in cultural boycott of Israel as in the last year and a half, since the Israeli war of aggression on Gaza.

 
 
Today there are campaigns for the academic and cultural boycott of Israel in the US, Britain, France, Italy, Spain, South Africa, Australia, Germany, Belgium, Canada, Norway, among others.

 
 
When artists or arts groups announce plans to perform — or display as the case may be — in Israel, PACBI and its partners around the world appeal directly to these artists, if a direct communication channel avails itself. Otherwise, we issue open letters and network with other groups to apply moral pressure on the artists/bands to convince them to cancel performances and exhibits in Israel.

 
 
Inspired by the South African anti-apartheid cultural boycott, PACBI has relied entirely on moral pressure, appealing to the conscience of the artists in question as well as their fans. When all else fails, supporters do at times organize civil protests at international concerts of artists who adamantly refuse to heed our calls.  Our main argument is that performing in a state that practices occupation, colonization and apartheid, as Israel does, cannot be regarded as a purely artistic act, if any such act exists. Regardless of intentions, such an act is a conscious form of complicity that is manipulated by Israel in its frantic efforts to whitewash its persistent violations of international law and Palestinian rights. This is because artistic performances in Israel promote a “business as usual” attitude that normalizes and sanitizes a state that has committed war crimes over several decades — in Gaza, Jerusalem, the Naqab (Negev), and now in the high seas against international humanitarian relief workers aboard the Freedom Flotilla.

 
 
An artist who performs in Israel today — just like any artist who violated the boycott and performed in Sun City, South Africa, during apartheid — can only be seen by Palestinians and people of conscience around the world as motivated by profit and personal gain far more than by moral principles. We know that Israeli concert promoters offer large sums of money to lure international performers as part of Israel’s “Brand Israel”[2] campaign, designed explicitly to hide Israel’s criminal violations of human rights under a guise of artistic and scientific glamour and a deceptive image of cultural excellence and “liberalism.”

 
 
In 1965, the American Committee on Africa, following the lead of prominent British arts associations, sponsored a historic declaration against South African apartheid, signed by more than 60 cultural personalities. It read: “We say no to apartheid. We take this pledge in solemn resolve to refuse any encouragement of, or indeed, any professional association with the present Republic of South Africa, this until the day when all its people shall equally enjoy the educational and cultural advantages of that rich and beautiful land.”[3] PACBI hopes to achieve the same level of commitment from international artists in isolating apartheid Israel.

 
 
The main impact of the boycott at this stage is to expose Israel as a pariah, to increase its isolation, thus raising the price of its injustices against the Palestinian people and challenging international complicity in perpetuating its occupation and apartheid.
 
In reaction to Israel’s Freedom Flotilla massacre which led to the murder of 9 unarmed Turkish humanitarian relief workers and human rights activists – one with dual Turkish/US citizenship — and to the injury of dozens more from several countries, leading cultural figures and bands reacted swiftly and decisively.

 
 
Endorsing a cultural boycott of Israel, world renowned British writer, Iain Banks, wrote in the Guardian that the best way for international artists, writers and academics to “convince Israel of its moral degradation and ethical isolation” is “simply by having nothing more to do with this outlaw state.”[4] This position by Banks was later endorsed by Stephane Hessel,[5] co-author of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Holocaust survivor and former French diplomat.

 
 
Many British literary and academic figures published a letter[6] in the Independent that said, “We … appeal to British writers and scholars to boycott all literary, cultural and academic visits to Israel sponsored by the Israeli government, including those organised by Israeli cultural foundations and universities.”

 
 
Cartoon artist Martin Rowson expressed the shock shared by millions in a cartoon[7] in the Guardian. Rowson depicted intimidating, heavily-armed Israeli commandos commandeering Noah’s ark, incarcerating all the frightened animals, with one of the soldiers cruelly crushing a dead peace dove — olive branch and all — justifying it to a devastated Noah by saying, “[The dove] was clearly intent on pecking innocent civilians.”

 
 
In the world of performing arts, the Klaxons and Gorillaz Sound System cancelled their scheduled concerts in Israel, reportedly due to the Flotilla attack,[8] and so did the Pixies.[9]

 
 
The latest famous performer to cancel a gig in Israel was US folk singer Devendra Banhart. While holding on to the delusional and peculiar concept that a musician can simply “share a human not a political message” even if performing to the oppressor community, as it were, in the context of occupation, apartheid and extreme violations of human rights, Banhart justified his withdrawal by saying that “it seems that we are being used to support views that are not our own.”[10] Israeli media outlets had tried to portray his scheduled gig as a political message in solidarity with Israel at a time of increasing isolation.

 
 
World best-selling writer, the Swedish Henning Mankell, who was on the Freedom Flotilla when attacked, called for South-Africa style global sanctions against Israel in response to its brutality.[11]

 
 
The best-selling US author, Alice Walker, reminded the world of the Rosa Parks-triggered and Martin Luther King-led boycott of a racist bus company in Montgomery, Alabama during the US civil rights movement, calling for wide endorsement of BDS against Israel as a moral duty in solidarity with Palestinians, “to soothe the pain and attend the sorrows of a people wrongly treated for generations.”[12]

 
 
In the weeks before the Flotilla attack, artists of the caliber of Elvis Costello, Gil Scott-Heron and Carlos Santana all cancelled[13] scheduled performances in Israel after receiving appeals from Palestinian and international BDS groups.
 
But even well before the latest Israeli bloodbath, many prominent international cultural figures had heeded or directly supported cultural boycott appeals issued by the PACBI and widely supported by Palestinian civil society. It may be most convenient to break down the various artists/cultural figures’ responses to the PACBI Call into three categories:

 
 
(A) Cultural figures (artists, authors, etc.) who explicitly support the Palestinian cultural boycott of Israel.
 
The statement by 500 Artists against Apartheid in Montreal[14] is the latest, most impressive of these efforts.
 
Earlier, in 2006, the famous British author and artist, John Berger, issued a statement[15] explicitly endorsing the cultural boycott of Israel.  He collected 93 endorsements then on this powerful declaration, including some very prominent writers and artists.

 
 
Other intellectuals and artists in this category who were not on the Berger list include: Ken Loach, Judith Butler, Naomi Klein, The Yes-Men, Sarah Schulman, Aharon Shabtai, Udi Aloni, Adrienne Rich, John Williams (perhaps the greatest classical guitarist alive), and now Iain Banks, Alice Walker, among others.

 
 
(B) Cultural figures who openly refuse to participate in Israel’s official celebrations and festivals for unambiguous political reasons.

 
 
In 2008, countering Israel’s “60th Anniversary” celebrations, PACBI collected tens of signatures of prominent artists and authors for a half-page advertisement[16] that was published in the International Herald Tribune on 8 May that year. The list included luminaries like Mahmoud Darwish, Augusto Boal, Roger Waters, Andre Brink, Vincenzo Consolo, and Nigel Kennedy. Some of the signatories on that ad later adopted the boycott explicitly, moving to Category (A) above.
 
(C) Cultural figures who decline offers to perform/speak in Israel or agree and then cancel without giving any explicit political reasons.

 
 
This category includes: Bono, U2, Bjork, Jean-Luc Godard, Snoop Dogg, and others.
 
PACBI appealed to Bono, for instance, in 2008 and again in 2010, urging him not to perform in Israel. Both times his performances were cancelled, but he never gave a specific reason to the media, other than the regular “scheduling” problem.  PACBI deeply appreciates his decision not to entertain Israeli apartheid.

 
 
Many top artists refuse to perform in Israel from the start.  The Forward, the leading Jewish daily in New York, informs us that at least 15 leading performers actually refused to play Israel, despite lucrative remuneration offers:

 
 
“In reaction, a music industry insider confirmed that the winds could be shifting. The music executive, who spoke on condition of anonymity in light of his ongoing business ties with artists, said that in recent months he had approached more than 15 performing artists with proposals to give concerts in Israel. None had agreed. The contracts offered high levels of compensation. He called them ‘extreme, big numbers that could match any other gig.’”[17]

 
 
Some artists argue that, instead of boycotting, they prefer to visit Israel and use the performance opportunity to express their views against Israeli injustices. This ostensibly noble idea is not only — unfortunately — too rare to be viewed as significant; it is ill conceived. Such a hypothetically courageous stance cannot possibly outdo or neutralize the far more substantial harm done due to these performances taking place, as Israel, with its formidable influence in mainstream Western media, cynically uses them to project a false image of normalcy that enables it to maintain its occupation and apartheid.  Ultimately, a conscientious artist is expected to heed the appeals of the oppressed as to what they really need from them in the struggle to end injustice and colonial oppression. This was true in the South African anti-apartheid struggle, too.

 
 
As to the commonly used “art ought to be above politics” argument, it is patently ahistorical and political par excellence.  Artists are humans who are expected to be more, not less, sensitive than others in empathizing with human suffering and rejecting oppression.  When they choose to side with hegemonic oppressors for money, fame or other material gains at the expense of basic commitment to human rights, they end up selling their souls and declaring their utter ethical corruption.  Artists, like Elton John,[18] who violated the anti-apartheid cultural boycott and entertained South Africans at Sun City, were viewed as crossing a moral picket line. So are those that insist on entertaining Israeli apartheid today.

 
 
The great majority of Palestinian cultural figures stand solidly behind the call for a cultural boycott of Israel,[19] as do all the main cultural institutions and associations. While Palestinian artists may indirectly suffer from a worldwide boycott, they view and accept this is as a minimal price to pay in order to see the light at the end of the long tunnel of Israeli occupation, ethnic cleansing, apartheid and racist denial of our refugee rights. In this context, Palestinian artists often express the commonly held view that world artists have a moral obligation to stop colluding with the oppressor, at the very least, in order to help end this multi-tiered oppression and bring about freedom and just peace.
 

Zionist lobby in Australia denies there is Zionist lobby

 29 Jun 2010

Zionist lobby? What lobby?

Jewish groups have questioned claims by a former Australian ambassador to Israel that Julia Gillard was silent on the “excesses” of Israel.

And the former editor of The Age, Michael Gawenda, yesterday labelled as “bizarre” a report in the Fairfax newspaper and its sister paper, The Sydney Morning Herald, that linked Ms Gillard’s stance towards Israel with a job given to her partner by an Israel lobbyist.

Former ambassador Ross Burns reportedly wrote in a letter to the Herald that Ms Gillard had been “remarkably taciturn on the excesses of Israeli actions in the past two years”.

He said Ms Gillard led a delegation to Israel last year for the Australia-Israel Leadership Forum, but failed to raise the issue that was “No 1 on the horizon”.

Mr Burns said the perception that Ms Gillard’s support for the Australia-Israel Leadership Forum was linked to a job later given to her partner, Tim Mathieson, by the man who helped to organise it, was unavoidable.

Jewish Community Council of Victoria president John Searle said the newspaper report did not accurately portray comments made in the past by Ms Gillard and the Rudd government, nor their behaviour.

Speaking in Ramallah in the West Bank during the trip, Ms Gillard called for a freeze on settlement activity by Jewish settlers in Palestinian territories.

Mr Mathieson accompanied the then-deputy prime minister to Israel last year.

A few months after the trip, Mr Mathieson, a hairdresser, began working as a real estate salesman for the founder of the Australia Israel Cultural Exchange, Melbourne property developer Albert Dadon, who organised the leadership delegation.

Last night, Mr Dadon, chairman of the Ubertad Group, released a statement saying Mr Mathieson was employed to fill a vacancy as a real estate salesman, and the company was pleased with his performance.

He said contrary to reports that Mr Mathieson had lobbied the Victorian government for approval for Ubertas’s developments, Mr Mathieson was involved only in sales.

Ubertas has already made its mark on Melbourne’s St Kilda Road office boulevard with an $86m twin-tower apartment that backs on to the inner city’s Fawkner Park.

But flush with the success of that 505 St Kilda Road project, the group has already started work on an even larger project at 568 St Kilda Road that will have more than 313 apartments and cost more than $160m.

 

Why Gillard is acceptable to the foreign policy elites

 29 Jun 2010

Scott Burchill, Fairfax National Times, 30 June:

It is not a ”privilege” to talk to the US President with our troops at war.

The primary goal of the US lobby in Australia is to insulate the alliance from changes of government after elections and leadership movements within the major political parties. Bipartisan support for the US alliance cannot always be assumed, however, so strategies are devised to raise the strategic aspects of the relationship above the fray of domestic politics in both countries.

During the Second Gulf War, Washington’s boosters in the Australian media sought to quarantine the alliance from widespread public hostility to George Bush. So, Labor leader Mark Latham could get away with describing Bush as ”the most incompetent and dangerous president in living memory”. But his questioning in his diaries of the value of the alliance confirmed for Australia’s US lobby that he was unfit for high office.

The Australian American Leadership Dialogue meets annually (alternately in the US and Australia). It’s an invitation-only bipartisan group of politicians, journalists, academics and businessmen who work to preserve and protect the bilateral relationship from criticism and challenges. Its deliberations are not made public.

One of the group’s primary aims is to socialise contemporary and future leaders into accepting the incontrovertible importance of the alliance. In the past week, the group has had good reason to believe that its investment in Julia Gillard – who has been attending its meetings for several years – has paid off.

In one of her first policy statements as Prime Minister, a remarkably obsequious Gillard told US President Barack Obama it was a ”great honour and privilege” just to talk to him. She then ”reassured” the President of her fidelity to the alliance, and gave him Australia’s continuing support for the military campaign in Afghanistan. Kevin Rudd may be gone, but his approach to the longest war in Australia’s history would not be changed by his successor.

To say that the conversation Gillard had with Obama was a missed opportunity does not fully capture the folly of her first foreign policy utterance as Prime Minister.

Three points stand out.

First, popular support in Australia for the Afghan war has collapsed. Depending on which poll you read, either 54 per cent (Lowy) or 61 per cent (Essential Media) of the population oppose continuing military involvement in Afghanistan and want Australian troops withdrawn.

These views have no representation in the lower house of the Federal Parliament. They are not even considered by the new Prime Minister to be a factor that qualifies Australia’s participation in the war. Gillard’s reflexive support may reassure Washington that she is ”sound” on national security – that the ”informal bar” on someone from the Left becoming Prime Minister could be lifted, to quote one lobbyist. However, it fundamentally betrays the wishes of the people she now represents.

In response to findings that 55 per cent of Australians are not confident that Australia has clear aims in Afghanistan (Lowy poll), former Labor senator Stephen Loosley reportedly said that ”as long as [there is] bipartisan support for [Australia's] Afghanistan contribution in Canberra, declining popular support for Afghan conflict is not an issue”.

This is a perfect illustration of elite disdain for public opinion. No wonder the same poll found that 69 per cent believe the government pays too little attention to their views ”in comparison to the opinions of foreign policy experts”.

Second, the vigorous discussion of the war now taking place in the US media and inside Washington’s is not mirrored here. This is largely the government’s fault. For a war that seems unwinnable and futile to so many Australians, the absence of an equally vibrant debate in this country is an indictment of our democratic processes. What are our politicians so frightened of?

The forensic examination of tactics, personalities, operations and the Taliban – which can be found across the US press every day – is almost entirely missing from the Australian media. It is only when tragedy strikes and casualties increase that analysis rises briefly above the superficial. Comparisons with the Vietnam War could not be more striking. Third, the humiliating departure of General Stanley McChrystal provided the opportunity to ask Obama critical questions – and leverage Canberra’s support against more definitive criteria.

We could be asking : What are your war aims? When will they be achieved? What are your criteria for ”success” in Afghanistan? What is the exit strategy? Instead, Gillard rushed to ”reassure” Obama (as if he needed it) that Australia would continue to be an uncritical ally in a war the public opposes. It’s an inauspicious start in diplomacy for our new Prime Minister. 

 

Caring about Shalit is so touching (but shame about those imprisoned Arabs)

29 Jun 2010

The cynicism here is almost comical. The Australian Jewish community and their American Jewish friends are deeply concerned about the plight of Gilad Shalit currently in Gaza. They are ably assisted by pieces such as this in the Washington Post, comparing Hamas to the Nazis. Leaders of the Zionist lobby in the US write articles explaining how the Jewish state is constantly striving for peace and only wants resolution of the conflict.

What’s so absurd is that less and less people believe any of this spin. How tone-deaf is the Zionist community? This is what Israel has become:

Avigdor Lieberman, Israel’s far-right foreign minister, set out last week what he called a “blueprint for a resolution to the conflict” with the Palestinians that demands most of the country’s large Palestinian minority be stripped of citizenship and relocated outside Israel’s future borders.

Lieberman warned that Israel faces growing diplomatic pressure for a full withdrawal to the Green Line, the pre-1967 border. Lieberman said that, if such a partition were implemented, “the conflict will inevitably pass beyond those borders and into Israel.”

He accused many of Israel’s 1.3 million Palestinian citizens of acting against Israel while their leaders “actively assist those who want to destroy the Jewish state.”

Lieberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu party campaigned in last year’s elections on a platform of “No loyalty, no citizenship” and has proposed a raft of loyalty laws over the past year targeted at the Palestinian minority.

True peace, the foreign minister claimed, would come only with land swaps, or “an exchange of populated territories to create two largely homogeneous states, one Jewish Israeli and the other Arab Palestinian.” He added that under his plan “those Arabs who were in Israel will now receive Palestinian citizenship.”

Unusually, Lieberman, who is also deputy prime minister, offered his plan in a commentary for the English-language Israeli daily newspaper Jerusalem Post, apparently in an attempt to make maximum impact on the international community.

He has spoken repeatedly in the past about drawing the borders in a way to forcibly exchange Palestinian communities in Israel for the Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

Posted in Uncategorized0 Comments

DOROTHY ONLONE NEWSLETTER

NOVANEWS

Dear Friends,

5 items from over a dozen that I deliberated sending.  Since 2 of the 5 are rather long, I thought you’d probably have enough with just the 5.  One can read so much. 

I’m not always so considerate, but when I find it too difficult to decide for you, I send the whole or almost the whole and let you decide what you wish to read, what not.

The first 2 items are reports.  The initial one relates that Israel is now making good its threat that I noted a few days ago.  The 4 Hamas members of the government whom Israel told to leave their homes and families refuse to leave.  Well, would you willingly leave your family, friends, home because a government told you to?  Israel will undoubtedly expel them.  Meanwhile it is jailing them.  These are not, by the way, individuals who have engaged in criminal acts.  They just belong to the wrong party.

The 2nd very brief report informs us of the kinds of things that Palestinians suffer—midnight raids by the IOF to capture and detain individuals who can’t otherwise be kept from demonstrating non-violently against the theft of their lands and destruction of their olive groves.  Every time I read about one of these events, I am reminded of the story that I have heard numerous times about how Nazi soldiers knocked on my in-laws door and took my mother-in-law to clean up the glass following Krystal Nacht. 

The family was fortunate.  She returned.  It was this incident that pushed my father-in-law to take his wife and 2 sons to Palestine, the only land that they had access to.

Item 3 is a response to Yossi Beilin regarding the Kairos document and Beilin’s comments to the Presbyterian Church in attempting to dissuade it from adopting bds (boycott/divestment/sanctions) against Israel.  It might interest you to know that in 2005 New Profile wrote a letter to PCUSA encouraging the Church to engage in selective divestment.

Item 4 is exactly what its title says “good news and bad”—about Israel and the OPT and the flotilla, of course.

Item 5 is a response to letters to the editor responding to an article in the Albuquerque Journal about the attack on the flotilla.

Dorothy

====================================

1. Haaretz Wednesday, June 30, 2010

Israel arrests Hamas official for failing to leave East Jerusalem

Mohammed Abu Tir, along with three other Hamas legislators, was ordered to leave Israel by July over his links with the militant organization.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/israel-arrests-hamas-official-for-failing-to-leave-east-jerusalem-1.299217

By Liel Kyzer

East Jerusalem Israel Police arrested Hamas official Mohammed Abu Tir on Wednesday for failing to comply with orders to leave his East Jerusalem home.

Abu Tir was arrested at the entrance to the city’s southeastern Armon Hanatziv neighborhood, and taken for questioning at the Russian Compound police headquarters.

Police are expected to ask a court on Thursday to remand Abu Tir in custody.

In early June, Jerusalem police confiscated Abu Tir’s Israeli identity card, along with those of three other Hamas legislators – Mohammed Totach, Khaled Abu Arafa, and Ahmed Atoun – giving them until July to leave Jerusalem.

All four have refused to give up their duties within the Hamas Legislative Council. Detectives from the Jerusalem District Police Central Unit took their identity cards after the High Court said it would not prevent the men’s expulsion.

Israel had warned the four men in the past to renounce membership of Hamas or risk losing residency rights in East Jerusalem.

On Thursday, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas denounced Israel’s plan to expel the four Hamas politicians from Jerusalem for belonging to the Islamic militant group Hamas, saying the expulsion Bank would set a dangerous precedent and would create new obstacles for peace.

Israel has stripped thousands of Palestinians of their Jerusalem residency since capturing the eastern part of the city in the 1967 Six-Day War, citing procedural reasons.

However, human rights activists say revoking the residency of the four Hamas politicians would mark the first time Israel had against Arab residents of the city because of their political affiliation. Israel considers Hamas a terrorist group.

More on this topic

Hamas official facing expulsion: I won’t leave my ancestral home

PA wants American pressure on Israel to allow freed Hamas lawmakers to keep blue ID cards

Print Page Send to a friend Comments Share Text Size +|- Follow us on Twitter Become a Haaretz.com Facebook friend This story is by:

Liel Kyzer

———————————

2. Iyad Burnat _ Night Raid on Bil’in 30-06-2010http://www.bilin-ffj.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=293&Itemid=1

In the small hours of last night, at around 3 am, Israeli Occupation Forces raided the village of Bil’in to effect the political arrest of villager; Yasir Maher Yasseen who, happily evaded their clutches yet again. The IOF have a long history of harassing and jailing this young activist and excepting the kidnapping of 13 year old Fadi Al-Khatib on the 4th of this month and the terrorising of a false confession out of him, this raid comes after a relatively long hiatus (22-05-2010 was the last military incursion into the village) and may be a harbinger for a spate of further terrorising raids to come.?

Ashrah Abu Rahmah, brother of Bassem who the IOF murdered on 17-04-2009 at a peaceful protest at the nearby Apartheid-Annexation Wall, distinguished himself yet again with his relentless and brave efforts to breach the IOF cordon around the home of Yasir. Bil’in salutes him.


If you want to unsubscribe please send an email to friends-of-freedom-and-justice-bilin-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net


3.  [forwarded by Connie Hackbarth]

Points 2 and 4 (through to the end) refer specifically to BDS
Justice is what we ask Mr. Yossi Beilin to remember

A Response to Mr. Yossi Beilin’s letter to the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in USA

[If you are unfamiliar with the Kairos document discussed below, see The

Kairos Document introduction http://www.kairospalestine.ps/?q=node/1

[The document can be downloaded in various languages 

http://www.kairospalestine.ps/?q=content/document  Dorothy]

————–

Rifat Odeh Kassis

On June 24, B’nai B’rith International circulated a letter written by Mr. Yossi Beilin, Israel’s Former Deputy Foreign Minister, and issued to delegates of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA). According to B’nai B’rith, Beilin’s letter sought to urge them against “unbalanced or counter-productive steps” on the Middle East.

One example of the “counter-productivity” Mr. Beilin feels the Presbyterian Church has wrongly endorsed is “A Moment of Truth,” the Kairos Document itself.  Mr. Beilin refers to the document as “polemical,” promoting a “blanket” strategy of boycott and sanctions. He criticizes the Presbyterian Church for supporting the views expressed in “A Moment of Truth” “without stated qualification,” citing the Kairos Document as a material that “[places] inordinate blame on Israel for the conflict.”

Throughout his letter, Mr. Beilin presents himself as a leading proponent of the peace process, a spokesperson for Israeli democracy, and an individual among the “most progressive and moderate among us” – in short, a voice whose calls for peace have been silenced by initiatives like the Kairos Document.

As the coordinator and a co-author of the Kairos Document – by which I also mean, as a member of a community working not only for peace, but also for peace with justice – I would like to respond to Mr. Beilin’s claims and statements. Mr. Beilin dramatically misunderstands and misstates the goals, content, and consequences of “A Moment of Truth.” Even more, however, his letter reveals misrepresentations of the very terms – “democracy,” “balance,” “peace process” – he supposedly extols. Indeed, rhetoric like Beilin’s heavily contributes to the continuation of the Israeli occupation, as well as to the justification of this status quo on the international stage.

What follows is a discussion of the major points I wish to contest.

1. Mr. Beilin introduces himself as a politician and peace activist whose career “has been defined by vigorous engagement in the pursuit of reconciliation and coexistence in the Middle East.” Chief among his stated credentials is his role as an initiator of the Oslo accords of 1993. Yet Mr. Beilin refers to Oslo as if it were a success – as if it were truly a symbol of, to use his words, reconciliation and coexistence. For Palestinians, this has never been the case. In fact, we have experienced the opposite.

The Oslo Accords have led to more illegal Israeli settlements, the Al-Aqsa Intifada, two wars (against Lebanon in 2006 and Gaza in 2008-2009), the Apartheid wall, and an astonishing number of violent deaths and brutal detentions. I wonder how long Mr. Beilin expects the Palestinian people to wait for Oslo to bear fruit for us – when we have seen no indication that it will. The “historic peace process” he defines as the Oslo Accords has been, for us, a historic failure.

2. I would also like to dispute Mr. Beilin’s argument against economic sanctions (which, as part of the global BDS campaign opposing the Israeli occupation, Kairos Palestine does support) on the grounds that Israel is a democracy. “I do believe in economic sanctions,” Beilin writes, “but when they are directed against democracies they are counter-productive.” Does this mean that he only believes in economic activism leveled against dictatorships? I fail to see how Israel’s “democratic” structure makes it immune to such measures – or to its inhabitants’ right to undertaking them.

The implications of Mr. Beilin’s logic are baffling: a democracy like Israel can behave as it likes, kill whom it wants, demolish homes, evict families, strip citizenships, imprison people for months or years without so much as informing them of the charges – but nothing should be done against it because it is a democracy? Israel’s much-touted reputation as “the only democracy in the Middle East” is always ironic, given its shocking track record of violating human rights and international law. But Mr. Beilin’s brief, weak argument against economic sanctions, using the existence of this “democracy” as its flimsy premise, is absurd indeed – especially when it comes from a former cabinet and parliament member of the democracy in question – and full of double standards.

3. Mr. Beilin addresses “narratives and activism,” specifically including the Kairos Document, “that appear to target Israelis or exclude recognition of any of Israel’s positive contributions to peace.” Does Mr. Beilin feel that we haven’t been adequately appreciative? It seems, rather, that Mr. Beilin himself is excluding recognition of Israel’s cynical, incendiary, and relentless actions that render the peace process humiliating at best and untenable at worst. The Israeli government continues to build settlements in the West Bank despite the so-called freeze, persists in demolishing the lives of Palestinian residents in East Jerusalem (the latest atrocity is the 22-house demolition order in Silwan, which will lead to the construction of a park), routinely nulls the citizenship of East Jerusalemites if they leave the country, keeps the keys to the jail of the West Bank and the solitary confinement of Gaza, besieging Gaza punishing more than one a half million people, slaughtered over 1400 Gazans (mostly civilians, including 350 children) in the war of 2008/2009, and murdered nine humanitarian activists (in international waters) aboard the Gaza-bound flotilla on May 31 of this year. If these actions have anything to do with Israeli’s contributions to peace, then we would prefer the contributions to stop.

4. Beilin concludes his letter to the Presbyterian delegates by urging them “to act for peace in a way that strengthens Israeli and Palestinian peacemakers alike.” It is for this very reason that we propose BDS as a means for peacemakers inside Israel to advocate for justice. Regrettably, the Israeli leftist movement has remained very weak. This weakness relates to the fact that strong criticism of Israel is often ignored or dismissed within the international community: many people fear Israel itself, or fear the stigma of being labeled anti-Semitic. This environment of fear and hesitation thus undermines the movement inside Israel and its endeavor to end the occupation.

But BDS, as a tactic with particular immediacy and collective power – including when enacted by Israelis, those who supposed to benefit from the occupation as it stands – is a unique chance to confront this environment and truly change it, both within Israel and with the solidarity of the international BDS movement. In short, we believe that BDS is an empowering, transformative peacemaking tool for Israeli and Palestinian activists alike.

Mr. Beilin’s attitude toward BDS, dismissing it as “imbalanced” or overly punitive, is by no means unfamiliar to us. Many, both in Israel and elsewhere, continue to reduce the Palestinian-Israeli conflict to a “balanced” dispute between two sides, refusing acknowledge that the situation is irrefutably otherwise: an apartheid state, brutally militarized and shamelessly discriminatory.

The Israeli occupation is a strategic, consistent, deliberate, historically constructed, externally condoned and internally sustained attempt to separate Palestinian and Israel rights and lives in the very place where we make and have always made our home. Boycotting Israel signifies boycotting this entire range of injustice.

If Mr. Beilin rejects BDS as a valid way to call for change, and as a right in and of itself, then what other means does he propose for creating peace in our region? With so much blood already shed and so many words (“democracy,” “balance,” “peace process”) sapped of their sincere, unironic meanings, how else does he believe Israel can be made to stop its destructive course?

The Israeli occupation of our land and our rights is not selective; justice must never be. This – justice, without which peace is meaningless – is what has been and continues to be missing from the peace process Mr. Yossi Beilin refers to in his letter. Justice is what both the Kairos Document and the BDS movement seek. And justice is what we ask Mr. Beilin to remember.

————————

4. [Forwarded by David N.]

Occupied Palestine: Good News And Bad

http://www.countercurrents.org/lendman250610A.htm

By Stephen Lendman

25 June, 2010

Countercurrents.org

First the good.

On June 22, the International Middle East Media Center reported that the UN Human Rights Council (that established the Goldstone Commission) approved “forming an international committee to probe the deadly Israeli” Flotilla attack, massacring and injuring dozens of nonviolent activists on board. Israel’s Defense Minister Ehud Barak urged Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to shelve it, saying:

“We expressed our view that for the time being, as long as….new flotillas are in the preparation, it’s probably better to leave (an investigation) on the shelf for a certain time” – in other words, postpone it long enough to forget, letting Israel’s self-examination whitewash top officials’ culpability, a vain hope given world outrage, mushrooming toward universally branding Israel a pariah rogue state.

The Human Rights Council (HRC) said committee officials will include lawyers and international law and human rights experts, the body to present its findings in September.

The European Campaign Against the Siege said the International Committee will contact Israel, Greece, Turkey, and the Freedom Flotilla coalition. It will also visit Gaza and urge Tel Aviv’s cooperation, what wasn’t given the Goldstone Commission, nor will be this time. However, with or without it, the investigation will proceed, exposing Israel’s culpability.

On June 1, the Russell Tribunal on Palestine (RTP) responded to the Flotilla massacre headlining, “All States and the international community must urgently take measures against Israel’s violations of international law,” explaining that

Throughout its history, Israel has willfully, arrogantly, and repeatedly violated core international law principles without accountability. “These violations….involve Israel’s international responsibility, its obligation to make reparations for the damage resulting from these violations and the obligation of all States to prosecute and punish those responsible for these violations when they concern crimes against international law,” especially ones against peace – the supreme international crime.

RTP “insists” on the immediate and unconditional:

– “lifting of the blockade by Israel of humanitarian aid,” what Fourth Geneva and other international laws prohibit;

– ending the Gaza siege, also lawless and prohibited;

– “full and independent inquiry into the” Flotilla attack;

– “suspend(ing) of the EU/Israel Association Agreement in accordance with” its provisions; and

– implementation of the Goldstone Commission conclusions and recommendations.

Global human rights organizations agree, including BRussells Tribunal Executive Committee member, Dr. Ian Douglas, saying:

“Israel simply cannot face up to its own bloody origin. It is a settler state, founded in violence by individuals who came from outside Arab countries,” under rogue governments that support and instigate “terrorism.” The solution:

“The international community must cut all economic ties, all defense coordination and contracts, and all diplomatic, intellectual and cultural links with Israel until Zionism is recognized as racism. Until this happens, Israel continues to be the single biggest threat to world peace.

The possibility of a better society will keep being suffocated by the black hole of Israel’s insistence on perpetuating injustice against the Palestinians,” – partnered with Washington, “indistinguishable from Tel Aviv, or vice versa. Obama is either unwilling (or) unable….to break from that….Palestinians have no hope in (him). He won’t help them, and never intended to.”

More good news – a first in America against Israel.

On June 20 in Oakland, CA, over 800 longshoremen pickets blocked the unloading of an Israeli ship, the ZIM Shenhen, chanting:

“Free, free Palestine. Don’t cross the picket line. An injury to one is an injury to all – the Israeli apartheid wall will fall.”

An ad hoc Labor/Community Committee in Solidarity with the People of Palestine organized the action. Allied groups included the Transport Workers Solidarity Committee, several Palestinian solidarity groups, the Bay Area ANSWER Coalition, and local labor activists.

Their boycott followed the earlier June International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) Local 10 motion condemning the Flotilla massacre, “call(ing) for unions to protest (by) any action they choose to take.”

Organizations supporting the boycott included the Oakland Educational Association, San Francisco Labor Council, Alameda County Labor Council, Cuban Labor Federation, Labor for Palestine, the Palestinian General Federation of Trade Unions, and numerous other groups – in solidarity with Occupied Palestinians.

Good news from Sweden – another boycott

On June 23, the Swedish Dock Workers Union announced a weeklong nationwide blockade in all unionized ports, refusing to handle goods from or to Israel until June 29, and demanding more, including lifting the Gaza siege and allowing an independent international investigation of the Flotilla massacre.

Still more – cancellation of Turkey’s water sales to Israel.

On June 20, Israel National News.com’s Maayana Miskin reported that Turkey “cancelled the planned sale of 1.75 billion cubic feet of water per year to Israel,” a 20-year agreement abandoned over the Flotilla massacre, Turkish Energy and Natural Resources Minister, Taner Yildiz, saying sales have been halted unless Israel “apologizes and expresses its regret.”

Turkey also recalled its ambassador and froze a plan to supply Israel with Russian natural gas through an underwater pipeline.

Now the bad – a litany of Israeli crimes, some recent ones explained below.

On June 10, Palestine Think Tank.com contributor Kawther Salam headlined, “107 Israeli Crimes Against Palestinian Journalists,” saying:

Since January 2010, Israeli attacks included beatings, “breaking their cameras, preventing them from covering events, shooting at them deliberately, arresting and jailing them, fabricating serious charges, fining them, imposing high financial fines before releasing them from detention,” denying them access to East Jerusalem and other areas, and let “dozens of armed extremist settlers assault them and damage their cameras.”

This is how a police state operates when not waging all out war.

More bad news.

On June 22, the Palestine Centre for Human Rights (PCHR) headlined, “Continued Ethnic Cleansing and Measures Aimed at Creating Jewish Majority in Occupied Jerusalem,” in fact, an agenda to make all Jerusalem exclusively Jewish, dispossessing all non-Jews living there.

PCHR responded saying:

It “strongly condemns aggressive (Israeli) measures in East Jerusalem, which are part of a series of (others) aimed at ethnic cleansing,” and have included:

– bulldozing Palestinian houses on lands between Pisgat Ze’ev and Neve Ya’kov settlements to build 600 new units – approved a year earlier to link the two communities;

– the June 21 implemented “Israeli Municipality in Jerusalem decision to demolish 22 houses in al-Bustan neighborhood in Salwan village (to) establish ‘King David’s Garden’ ” on expropriated Palestinian land; on June 23, Haaretz writer Nir Hassan reported that East Jerusalem settlers “threatened to (hire private security firms to) forcibly evict four Palestinian families they claim are living on” Jewish Silwan property; East Jerusalem, in fact, is Occupied Palestinian territory, not belonging to invaders who have no business being there or legal right to the land;

– the June 20 Israeli High Court ruling, affirming the deportation of PLC member, Mohammed Abu Tir, a member of the Hamas-affiliated Change and Reform Bloc;

– the June 20 closing of the Ilaf Association for Education Support in Jerusalem, using falsified documents to claim Hamas held meetings there; and

– Israel’s ongoing lawlessness in violation of international law, including expropriating Palestinian land, what, so far, the international community won’t stop.

More bad.

On June 20, the US State Department Bureau of Consular Affairs warned Americans against traveling to Gaza, stopping short of saying those doing it will be prosecuted, but calling it “infiltrating” by flotillas or other means.

The warning “applies to all US citizens, including journalists and aid workers,” with no mention of the illegal siege, the Flotilla massacre, or repeated attacks against defenseless civilians. A week earlier, Britain issued a similar alert, suggesting UK citizens doing it wouldn’t be welcomed back home. Israel endorsed both statements from its closest allies, together comprising the real axis of evil.

Still more.

On June 20, Haaretz writer Barak Ravid exposed Netanyahu’s bogus siege easing, headlining “Netanyahu: Security blockade on Gaza will get stronger,” quoting him saying that despite letting in more “civilian” goods:

The “security closure will be tightened from now on (to) keep (weapons and “dual use” goods) out of Gaza,” claiming “Our friends around the world are getting behind our decision and giving international legitimacy to the security blockade on Hamas.”

So though designated foods, housewares, writing implements, mattresses and toys can enter, cement and shoes (among hundreds of other non-military items) remain banned, Israel bogusly calling them “dual use,” meaning materials potentially for violence and conflict.

On June 24, Gaza Gateway.org reported “no significant change in the volume of trucks entering Gaza,” despite the supposed easing – last week, 654, fewer than before the Flotilla massacre when 662 entered; this week through four of five allowed crossing days, 567, “consistent with the (imposed) policy since June 2007.”

Gaza Gateway said only one crossing operates at near capacity of about 110 trucks a day, five days a week permitted – Kerem Shalom (Kerem Abu Salam). Karni Crossing, Gaza’s commercial lifeline, able to handle 1,000 trucks per day, remains closed.

The Obama administration and virtually all members of Congress support the most lawless Israeli policies, including the siege, subsidizing them with billions of dollars annually, the latest weapons and technology, and virtually any special requests – to wage war, commit violence, maintain an illegal occupation against Palestinian civilians and the legitimate Hamas government, bogusly called terrorist.

Confirmation of PA/Israeli/Washington Complicity

According to a June 22 Asa Winstanley Electronic Intifada (EI) article headlined, “Exclusive: Leaked documents show PA undermined Turkey’s push for UN flotilla probe:”

“A document sent to Ibrahim Khraishi, (PA UN) representative in Geneva,” shows its officials tried but failed to “neutralize a (UN) Human Rights Council (HRC) resolution condemning” the Flotilla massacre, by preventing an independent investigation and endorsing an Israeli one – a thinly veiled scheme to whitewash premeditated murder and absolve high-level culpability. Turkey rejected it out of hand. HRC approved an independent committee proceed and report back by September.

EI’s article and one document can be accessed through the following link:

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article11350.shtml

Last year, Fatah officials tried to undermine the Goldstone Commission’s findings, proving they ally with Israel against their own people.

Last October, however, when the Commission’s findings were adopted, Mahmound Abbas “was forced into a humiliating U-turn after an outpouring of disgust and protest from Palestinians around the world,” not diminishing his contempt for his own people. Perhaps theirs now for him enough to elect a new president serving them, not their oppressive occupier in league with its Washington paymaster/partner.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/

==============================

5.  Hi All,

On June 23 the Albuquerque Journal printed an op-ed by me on the Gaza Flotilla attack. On June 27 the Journal printed 5 letters to the editor all of which characterized me as an uninformed bigot. Today I replied with a rebuttal to the five who, not being able to refute actual evidence, resort to character assassination. Attached are the 5 letters to the editor as well as today’s rebuttal. And just below is the link to my original op-ed for those who have not read it. If you are unable to open the attachment I’ve also pasted my entire rebuttal after the link . Thanks, Rich

http://www.abqjournal.com/opinion/guest_columns/23213193866opinionguestcolumns06-23-10.htm

On June 23 the Journal printed my article on the Gaza flotilla, which they titled “Oppressive Occupation Also Harms Israelis, Americans.” In the article I presented information from the State Department, American Near East Refugee Aid and other reliable sources. My purpose was to counter “disingenuous claims” by Israel. On June 27 the Journal printed five letters to the editor. All portrayed me as bigoted and ignorant. Regina Loria said:

 “[T]he Arabs walked through Jewish neighborhoods and towns unmolested, while the Jews lived behind stone walls, armed wire and armed guards. Who is occupying whom?”

According to Loria, Israelis who forcefully steal land from Palestinians to build settlements – in violation of international law and any sense of decency – are occupied victims. And a people who desire the same rights to self-determination that Israelis enjoy are occupiers.

Deborah Gray accuses me of being uninformed because of my commonsense assertion that “Israel’s behavior,” in denying Palestinians the ability to live like human beings, “fuels anti-Semitism.” Gray chose to equate my criticism of Israeli behavior with criticism of all Jews. Israel does not speak for all Jews, certainly not for Jews who value justice and equality. Gray’s logic is that anti-Semitism existed prior to Israel’s establishment. Therefore, she contends, Israel’s behavior could not be a stimulus for anti-Semitism.

As virtually all studies since the early 1900s acknowledge, there was little anti-Semitism in Muslim lands until the rise of Zionism. Just as anger toward Muslims increased in the U.S. after 9/11 so too does anger increase when Israel kills civilians or attacks an unarmed ship carrying humanitarian aid. Admittedly, a small percentage of the anger is misplaced against Judaism rather than a Zionist ideology that deprives people of their homes, their lands and their dignity.

Joel Davis claims that pro-Palestinian activists “were trying to create an ugly incident to spur world pressure forcing Israel to break the blockade and … to allow unlimited passage of arms from Iran.” The latter allegation is false. Not only was the ship’s cargo checked before leaving port but overtures from Iranian groups were rejected. The ugliness of the incident stems from Israel’s deliberate acts of aggression.

I agree that these activists wanted to bring attention to the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Their concern for their fellow man does not reflect a bias that favors Palestinians. Rather, it reflects a conviction that Palestinians are entitled to the same quality of life as Israelis, something Davis and the others don’t seem particularly concerned with. The activists’ reaction to a nighttime raid in international waters by a country known for its use of lethal force was purely defensive, especially given that Israeli commandos did in fact shoot live ammunition and percussion grenades as they boarded the ship.

Jacob Amir denounces the passengers of the Mavi Marmara on the basis that the other ships offered no resistance. The fact that commandos singled out the Mavi Marmara with confrontational behavior explains why the other ships did not resist. Would Amir have denounced the passengers of the Exodus for resisting British rule?

Perhaps these writers would have condemned the freedom riders, some of whom gave their lives to expose the viciousness and bigotry of segregation in the Deep South.

Russell Resnik characterizes my concern for truth and human rights as Hamas propaganda. Making such a characterization is far easier than examining actual evidence based on eyewitness reports and the writings of eminent Israeli journalists. It is easier still to parrot uninformed apologists.

Resnik justifies the blockade of Gaza on the basis of rocket attacks while ignoring the fact that Israel’s own strategists admitted that ending the blockade would ensure peace with Hamas for a generation. He also ignores Israel’s use of far more lethal rockets against Gaza. If he had taken the time to investigate Israeli sources he would have learned that from 2000 through 2008 Palestinian groups launched 8,088 rockets and mortars against Israel. 

From 2001 through 2008 eighteen Israelis were killed as a result of these attacks. From September 2005 to June 2006 Israel launched 7,700 rockets against Gaza. From 2005–2007, 1,290 Gazans, including 222 children, were killed as a result of Israeli rockets.

By justifying policies that knowingly harm civilians, including innocent children, these writers show a disregard not only for the Palestinian people but for the humanity that exists within the heart of Judaism.

Rich Forer

 Albuquerque

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized0 Comments

BARRED FROM JERUSALEM BY ZIO=NAZI FOR BEING PALESTINIAN

NOVANEWS

The Independent Tuesday, 29 June 2010

Barred from Jerusalem for crime of being Palestinian

Engineer’s battle to overturn loss of residency highlights plight of thousands

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/barred-from-jerusalem-for-crime-of-being-palestinian-2013066.html

By Donald Macintyre in Jerusalem

Samir Abu-Khalaf holds a photograph of his son Murad, whose East Jerusalem residency was revoked by Israeli authorities

To say that Palestinian Murad Al-Khalaf’s roots are in Jerusalem is a serious understatement. His family lived in the Baka district of West Jerusalem until they were forced to leave in the war of 1948. They have since lived – and live – in the inner East Jerusalem district of Ras al-Amud. His family doctor father’s clinic in East Jerusalem’s main street of Salahadin is opposite three shops owned by each of his uncles. One of his brothers, also a doctor, works at one of Jerusalem’s two main (Israeli) hospitals, the Shaare Zedek Medical Centre. The city is, in short, his home.

But when the next hearing of a case of fundamental importance to the future of this super-qualified young man takes place in the Jerusalem District Court today, he won’t be there. At the age of 33, he has suddenly become, to use his own word, “stateless”. His only “crime” has been to spend several years in the US doing an electrical engineering PhD, completing post-doctoral research funded by a division of the US Army, acquiring high-tech work experience with the sole purpose of bettering his future career prospects in the Holy Land, and being a little homesick.

Yet in 2008 the young Dr Abu-Khalaf became a statistic, one of a record 4,577 Palestinian residents to have their Israeli-conferred status as a resident of East Jerusalem revoked in that year and with it the right to live permanently or work in either Israel or the occupied Palestinian territories. It is this revocation which is being challenged in court on his behalf by the Israeli human rights lawyer Leah Tsemel today, and about which he says: “Losing my residency in my country is a source of pain to me… I feel I am being asked to choose between building my career and my homeland.”

For Dr Abu-Khalaf has been told his only chance of having the revocation “reconsidered” – and it’s far from certain this would succeed – is if he gives up his high-flying job as a software developer, leaves the US and stays here for at least two years – maybe “working in a café”, as he puts it. So far Dr Abu- Khalaf has been told he will no longer qualify for an Israeli travel document. He would still be able to visit the country as a tourist, though not work or live in it, and then only if he obtains a US travel document.

If Dr Abu-Khalaf was an Israeli citizen he would be able to take up temporary residency for as long as he liked without losing his rights. But his case exemplifies the fragile status of more than 200,000 East Jerusalem Palestinians, who have Israeli conferred ID, and the right – denied to most West Bank Palestinians – to travel in Israel and access to certain benefits like Israeli health insurance, but not the security of full citizenship. According to Ir Amim, an Israeli NGO campaigning for an “equitable and stable” shared Jerusalem, the sharp increase in residency revocations are part of “an ongoing Israeli policy to reduce the Palestinian presence in East Jerusalem”.

When Israel unilaterally annexed Arab East Jerusalem after the Six-Day War – an annexation whose legality has never been accepted by most of the international community, including Britain – it offered Palestinian residents citizenship. But the large majority refused, believing that to accept would reinforce Israel’s claim on occupied East Jerusalem.

Part of Dr Abu-Khalaf’s problem was that he applied successfully for a “green card” purely to maximise his job opportunities, but unwittingly reinforcing Israel’s determination to cut off his Jerusalem residency. Dr Abu-Khalaf said when he was job-searching “many potential employers replied to me asking if I held a green card.” They told him that “otherwise they could not employ me… I never knew it would cause all this fiasco.”

His father, Samir Abu-Khalaf, wanted Murad to return and marry when he had laid the firm basis of a career. “It’s injustice to deal with us in this way,” he said. “It seems they want Palestinians only to be workers, cleaners.” To his son it is illogical that in an age when academic and corporate life is increasingly multinational, he should be penalised for participating in it. The loss of residency “in my home country”, he said, is “at best inconsiderate… extremely backward looking, and short-sighted.”

An Interior Ministry spokeswoman said the law prescribed that East Jerusalem residents were treated like any other people with resident status, losing it if they are away for more seven years or take up residency elsewhere. Asked whether the position of native East Jerusalemites was not different from – say – those from France temporarily living and working in Israel she added: “If you want someone to justify the policy you are asking the wrong person. But it’s the law.”

Posted in Uncategorized0 Comments

A.LOEWENSTEIN ONLINE NEWSLETTER

NOVANEWS    

There is a Zionist lobby in Australia and let’s look inside some more

 29 Jun 2010

Following the story in yesterday’s Fairfax media about Prime Minister Julia Gillard and her love for Israel and its cuddly lobby here in Australia, the following letters appear in the Age today:

Peace throughout the Middle East cannot be achieved until Western nations such Australia show we are as concerned about justice for Palestinians as we are about security for Israelis. The Israeli lobby in Australia has been very effective in gaining the support of governments over the past 60 years.

Evidence that our new Prime Minister (The Age, 29/6) is following this pattern does not give cause for optimism that Australia will bring new initiatives to this conflict. Until our government shows respect and effective concern for the situation of the Palestinians, our costly commitments to bringing peace in Afghanistan and Iraq will be ineffective.

Wal Jenkyn, Manifold Heights

We may have Israeli lobbyists in Australia but we also have Palestinian lobbyists who work just as hard. In the past two weeks, two pro-Palestinian Labor MPs gave speeches in Parliament. Also, senators from both sides of Parliament and Arab ambassadors recently attended a dinner organised by Australians for Palestine. Visiting Palestinian activist Dianna Buttu was the guest speaker. It was one of many events organised by Palestinian lobbyists and was just as legitimate as Israeli lobbyists doing their job.

Lobbyists from all countries cover political and non-political issues. I am sure Australia has its own in Washington, Britain and China.

Michael Burd, Toorak

 

Chomsky on the invisible Iranian nuclear ghost

 29 Jun 2010

Noam Chomsky on a nation that threatens something other than Israel:

Such harrowing pronouncements aside, what exactly is the Iranian threat? An authoritative answer is provided in the April 2010 study of the International Institute of Strategic Studies, Military Balance 2010. The brutal clerical regime is doubtless a threat to its own people, though it does not rank particularly high in that respect in comparison to US allies in the region. But that is not what concerns the Institute. Rather, it is concerned with the threat Iran poses to the region and the world.

The study makes it clear that the Iranian threat is not military. Iran’s military spending is “relatively low compared to the rest of the region,” and less than 2% that of the US. Iranian military doctrine is strictly “defensive,… designed to slow an invasion and force a diplomatic solution to hostilities.” Iran has only “a limited capability to project force beyond its borders.” With regard to the nuclear option, “Iran’s nuclear program and its willingness to keep open the possibility of developing nuclear weapons is a central part of its deterrent strategy.”

Though the Iranian threat is not military, that does not mean that it might be tolerable to Washington. Iranian deterrent capacity is an illegitimate exercise of sovereignty that interferes with US global designs. Specifically, it threatens US control of Middle East energy resources, a high priority of planners since World War II, which yields “substantial control of the world,” one influential figure advised (A. A. Berle).

 

Is there a connection between Dubai and Gilad Shalit?

29 Jun 2010

Remember Israel’s hit on a Hamas operative in Dubai?

The story is still running though is largely ignored by the mainstream press these days.

Newsweek publishes an intriguing piece that adds more spice to the yarn:

European investigators believe that a man arrested by Polish authorities earlier this month may be a key fixer in Europe for Israel’s Mossad spy agency. The man, who a European official said was arrested at Warsaw airport when trying to enter Poland on June 4, was using an Israeli passport in the name of Uri Brodsky. A second European official familiar with the inquiry said investigators believe Brodsky is not the suspect’s real name and that his true identity remains a mystery.

Official and unofficial spy aficionados are still puzzled over why Israel would ruin its previously friendly relationship with authorities in a key Gulf emirate, and blow the identities of so many undercover operatives, just to eliminate an obscure Hamas operative. One theory gaining support among intelligence experts is that Mossad’s intent was to drug and kidnap Mabhouh, and then try to use him in a trade for Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier held hostage in Gaza by Hamas. But the Israelis, according to this theory, may have overdosed their target on knockout drops.

 

We’re dying in Afghanistan and you want to hug a general?

 29 Jun 2010

While here’s yet another mainstream journalist upset that Michael Hastings actually embarrassed military men in Afghanistan – it truly seems that many corporate reporters and commentators would rather general worship towards men and women in uniform – the real cost of two devastating wars is brought home. When was the last an injured service person was given air-time in our mainstream media as opposed to soft-ball interviews with war officials in Kabul?

A blogger and writer claims American military casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan now exceed 500,000.

That’s if you count certain injuries and diseases including mental illness that he alleges the Department of Defense doesn’t include in its official combat-related casualty toll in an effort to soften U.S. military losses in the wars and win funding for them from the Congress.

For example, cases of traumatic brain injury and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, or PTSD, as a result of serving in Iraq and Afghanistan are excluded from the official list of casualties.

“Under this scheme, chronic injuries and many acute internal injuries such as hearing impairment, back injuries, mild traumatic brain injuries, mental health problems and a host of diseases suffered by personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan are usually not counted as being war-related regardless of how debilitating they are,” writes Matthew Nasuti in an article published on the Afghan news site and media organization Kabul Press. “They are either generally lumped into the category of ‘non-hostile wounded’ or simply not counted at all.”

 

Walid Shoebat should not be heard in Pakistan

 29 Jun 2010

This is weird. Pakistan is reportedly planning to massively increase its online censorship regime. Just another US-backed dictatorship wanting to shut down debate. Not much new here except one site has supposedly already been blocked, of Mr Walid Shoebat, former Palestinian militant and now rabid Zionist and anti-Islam activist.

Is Pakistan seriously banning this man because of his views on Islam?

 

The battle between Wikileaks and Miley Cyrus

 29 Jun 2010

According to this Canadian writer, Wikileaks has been largely ineffective in truly bringing change because of our incredibly short attention spans:

The “collateral murder” video has been viewed almost 7m times on YouTube – that’s 128 times fewer than the video for Miley Cyrus’s Party in the USA. That comparison might seem silly, but it hints at a bigger problem. That is, the “collateral murder” video, as it became a part of the usual TV structure of message-advertisement-message, was reduced to an equivalent of all other parts of the usual pattern of disarticulation and abstraction of signs. In essence, “collateral murder” was overshadowed by a Miley Cyrus video because, in the end, it became part of a structure inherently designed to nullify its message by promoting the status quo of the culture industry.

So, as much as WikiLeaks thrives in its online setting, its information still falls prey to the sameness of modern media. Even if someone were to see the video on YouTube, the same mechanisms prevail, with all information – including web advertisements and other videos – being presented as equal. Effectively, the only way one can view a WikiLeaks video without that influence is on the site itself, where it lives within certain confines, and with less influence.

 

What is wrong with this picture?

 29 Jun 2010

Israel’s Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman says this week that an independent Palestinian state is at least two years away.

Jerusalem’s mayor continues to expand Jewish control in the city, pushing out Palestinian families.

The International Trade Union Confederation votes to maintain the status-quo, oppose boycott, divestment and sanctions and speak like it’s still 1993.

But there is trouble in paradise. Zionists and their supporters who simply hope and pray for a change in Israel are deluding themselves. Action is being taken:

The leaders of European Friends of Israel (EFI), the European lobby for Israel and its economy, warned yesterday of a deterioration in the political climate in Europe against Israel, and an increase in the phenomenon of boycotts of Israeli products and businesspeople throughout Europe.  They noted that there was a growing phenomenon of European investment funds that were divesting from Israeli companies, for reasons defined as “business ethics.”

 

Don’t speak to terrorists because we must keep Israel strong

 29 Jun 2010

This is how Fox News deals with the Middle East. The Obama administration may be speaking to Hamas. Treason!

The people of Gaza are too fat and healthy

 28 Jun 2010

Zionist lobbyists, get a grip:

A pro-Israeli advocacy organization is throwing a cocktail party in New York Monday night to discuss a phenomenon it says is a crisis in Gaza: Palestinians are too fat.

“[T]he only humanitarian crisis in Gaza is OBESITY,” the group Fuel For Truth said in an email inviting young Jewish professionals to a promotional event at a lower Manhattan bar.

The subject line of the email was “Media Launch Party: Drinks and Fat Gazans.”

The group also included a video apparently mocking the situation Gaza. The video did not mention that the United Nations and all international aid groups agree that there is a humanitarian crisis in Gaza resulting from Israel’s blockade of the territory, a measure which the Red Cross says is illegal under international law.

In its video the group said Palestinians are receiving too much aid, despite the fact that, as the UN noted in a report last week, the number of truckloads of goods entering Gaza is still at only one-fifth of the level before the blockade was imposed in June 2007.

On its website Fuel For Truth (FFT) says it ”equips young Americans with the basic facts and skills necessary to advocate to young adults, to increase support for Israel and America through education of radical Islamic terror.”

The group also holds a regular “boot camp” for pro-Israeli activists and says Israel lobbyists should “arm themselves,” with information, presumably.

Posted in Uncategorized0 Comments

MONDOWEISS NONLINE NEWLETTER

NOVANEWS

I’m crushed and livid (massive Jewish expansion set for Obama’s lap, East Jerusalem)

Posted: 28 Jun 2010

I’m crushed and livid. Jerusalem master plan: Expansion of Jewish enclaves across the city:

The Jerusalem District Planning and Building Committee is set to approve an unprecedented master plan that calls for the expansion of Jewish neighborhoods in East Jerusalem, a move largely based on construction on privately owned Arab property.

This is heating up to massive proportions. And Coteret brings us more info:

Channel Ten News: Construction starts at Shepherd Hotel settlement compound in Sheikh Jarrah, East Jerusalem

Last night, riots broke out in the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Silwan as settlers, backed by Border Police, moved to evict Palestinians from a structure used as a mosque. …. Yaacov Elon: Very quietly Israel began construction of a new neighborhood in the Shepherd Hotel complex in East Jerusalem. ..You can hear the construction sounds in the background. What’s happening there, Roi? Roi Sharon: Work ended here this afternoon at the Shepherd Hotel in Sheikh Jarrah in East Jerusalem.

Work began this morning, the construction that has already caused several diplomatic crises between Jerusalem and Washington, materialized this morning when the construction team arrived here with a micro fine drill and began the work.

Aha! Careful incisions! So livid. I’m practically speechless.

Religion doesn’t matter any more,

Posted: 28 Jun 2010

Noah Feldman of Harvard Law School says in a piece in the NYT pointing out that Elena Kagan will make it three Jews on the Supreme Court, and no Protestants. It’s easy for him to say, he’s a winner. Also, Feldman served in the Coalition Provisional Authority in the Iraq war and occupation. Was Zionism, which has a religious component, a factor in support for the Iraq war among Jews manning the establishment? 

By the way, Feldman doesn’t credit E. Digby Baltzell with helping to open the blueblood doors in the ’60s. His book the Protestant Establishment was very important, though; it said that a caste of WASPs was keeping out the talented, including many Jews. The honest question that Feldman won’t go near here is whether the networks that I was part of at Harvard in the 70s, the rising Jewish establishment that lifted him too, didn’t have a castelike quality.

Certainly we looked out for one another. Is it mere coincidence that Lawrence Summers, a Jew, taps Elena Kagan to be dean of the Law School? What is our Jewish obligation, as winners, to hire diversely? (And yes, I include myself).

P.S. Here is Adam Garfinkle, also of the Iraq war braintrust, writing in Jewcentricity about religion and the neocons, and showing that religion matters very much indeed:

Neoconservatives are the purest expression of two phenomena simultaneously. First, they are an American Jewish example of the broad modern tendency for religious energies to attach themselves to politics, and second, they are an expression of stereoscopic chosenness, having filtered out the realism-inducing study of Jewish history and replaced it with the heroic narratives of American and modern Zionist histories…

Neoconservatives tend to unite aroudd the conviction that small, beleaguered groups of chosen believers can prevail over all odds if they stick to their beliefs… If this sounds like the sort of reaction one would have expected from Jews in centuries past who were assailed in their ghettoes and small villages by masses of threatening ignoramuses around them, that’s no coincidents. There really is such a thing as the moral chauvinism of the downtrodden…

Supporting Iraq war was, and apparently still is, a good career move

Posted: 28 Jun 2010

I’m told that last year in a panel at Columbia Journalism School, a writer for The New Yorker said that only one member of the magazine’s staff who dealt with foreign policy opposed the Iraq war. Wow. Why did this leading magazine that told people how to think about Vietnam flub this one so bad?

There is no introspective spirit in this New Yorker piece by George Packer about why we went to war with Iraq. Apparently, Peter Beinart and Packer himself did so because of Republicans, and a spirit that fairies implanted in the American establishment:

Reagan’s rhetorical call for an end to the Soviet Empire prompted second-generation neoconservatives, such as Robert Kagan, William Kristol, and Elliott Abrams, to imagine that democracy could be delivered to the whole world by F-22s…

President George H. W. Bush’s invasion of Panama, in December of 1989, now seems hardly more consequential than Reagan’s splendid little war in Grenada. But, as Beinart reminds us, Panama became a dress rehearsal for the ideological battle over Iraq, and a key transition from the hubris of toughness to the hubris of dominance.

But Beinart and Packer are liberal Democrats. What did they believe that made them so wrong? Packer gives us class-day bromides:

“Beinart’s fundamental message is to avoid hubris and cultivate wisdom.”

Got that? I bet those two isms that scare me so much, careerism and Zionism, had something to do with it. Beinart has said recently that he would sacrifice his liberal values in Israel for his Zionism. What else would it make him do? Why did Tom Friedman say he wanted the U.S. to smash something in the Arab world to answer suicide bombers in Tel Aviv?

Why did Ken Pollack, leading the New York Times forward to the hustings, dismiss the Palestinian issue as meaningless to the Arab street?

P.S. The piece misspells the word “overweening,” putting an a in it. Hard times at the New Yorker.

The movie where Ari Ben Canaan finds out his father is Darth Vader

Posted: 28 Jun 2010

From Slate’s the best movies never made:

Genesis 1948
In 1970, Otto Preminger bought the screen rights to Dan Kurzman’s 800-plus-page nonfiction chronicle of “The First Arab-Israeli War,” intending a follow-up to his 1960 epic, Exodus. At a press conference, he said, “We’ll show both the conflict on the battlefield and in the political arenas in Washington, Moscow, the United Nations, and the Mid-East.” He expressed the hope that the film “will offend neither Arabs nor Jews” without acknowledging that Exodus had certainly offended Arabs.

 Israeli parents, meanwhile, had reason to be wary of Preminger’s planned location shoot. While filming Exodus, he labored over one scene in which a dozen very young Israelis were to cry on cue as Arabs attacked their homes. When they wouldn’t cooperate with tears, Preminger instructed an assistant to lead the children’s mothers over a hill and out of sight. ”You see, your mothers have been taken away,” Preminger informed them.

”You are never going to see them again—never!” The children obediently burst into tears. But instead of Genesis 1948, he made a domestic-discord movie, Such Good Friends.

Elena Kagan made who/whom mistake in 2006

Posted: 28 Jun 2010

And oh god, I bet she’s another sleeper Zionist, too; the Times says she praised an Israeli judge as her hero at Harvard Law School.

In 2006, while dean of Harvard Law School, Ms. Kagan introduced Judge [Aharon] Barak during an award ceremony as “my judicial hero.” She added, “He is the judge or justice in my lifetime whom, I think, best represents and has best advanced the values of democracy and human rights, of the rule of law and of justice.”

Of course this Times story paints Barak as a great liberal. The only democracy, right? God save the Jewish people, and the people people too.

To defuse one-staters, liberal Zionist must justify ‘wrongs’ of ‘48

Posted: 27 Jun 2010

This is further evidence that Zionists across the board are seriously out of touch with reality. In Haaretz, Chaim Gans invokes humanism and morality in condemning the post 67 settlements but accepts as just the far greater crimes that were committed in 1948, which he doesn’t deny. Gans is forced to make the argument because he states that the one-state position has been given impetus not just by the left, but by right-wing settlers who are endangering the entire enterprise: 

the wrongs committed after 1967 threaten the justice of Zionism in its entirety, while pre-’67 wrongs were wrongs of particular moves in the realization of Zionism.

The source of this distinction is of course the well-known distinction between the jus ad bellum and jus in bello. There is no contradiction between the claim that Britain’s bombing of Dresden during World War II was a criminal act and the claim that this criminality represented a step taken in a just war – even a sublimely just war, the war against Nazism.

We must acknowledge the great injustices committed by Zionism up to 1967. We have to take responsibility for them (via reparations ) – mainly for the expulsion of refugees. We must also acknowledge the high price the Palestinians paid for the realization of Zionism, even when Zionism did not commit injustices against them. But none of these admissions undermines the justice of Zionism in the least.

Thus, his embrace of Jewish superiority, in the end, makes him no different than those he criticizes. Comparing the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians with the allied bombing of Dresden, as if the Palestinians had initiated a massive war against the Jews and  deserved no more consideration than did the Nazis, is mind boggling from someone who is attempting to present himself as a reasonable man. Are there, one may well ask, any reasonable Zionists?

Anti-Zionist show in Rochester is back on, though not in original church venue

Posted: 27 Jun 2010

Yesterday we ran musician Rich Siegel’s report that a gig he was doing at a church in Rochester, NY, with Gilad Atzmon, like Siegel an anti-Zionist, got cancelled because of political pressure, including from a local temple, B’rith Kodesh. Some folks who read the report queried John Keevert, a Rochester social justice activist who had helped schedule the event at his Unitarian church.

Keevert said that Siegel’s report was inaccurate. “We did not cancel because of Temple pressure.” Why then? “Scheduling conflict,” he wrote in a note to the questioners. “it has been scheduled in a new location, same time.” We asked Siegel for the latest:

The concert has been reinstated, but at a different venue.  I am convinced that the concert was initially canceled because of the objection from the rabbi.  And I believe that what is being said now is pure bull.

Here’s the story:  This concert/presentation at First Unitarian of Rochester has been booked for probably around two months- I can check old e mails to verify.  All of a sudden we get a communication that the concert is canceled.  Two reasons are given:  1) that there are other events scheduled at the same time in the building, and the noise level would interfere, and 2) that a local rabbi contacted the church objecting to Gilad Atzmon.

So please note that it was stated outright from the start that ONE of two reasons was the communication from the rabbi. To deny this now is disingenuous.

The concert/presentation came about when Dan McGowan, founder and chairman of Deir Yassin Remembered, booked us to play in Geneva, NY, which we are also doing, and then got in touch with the church and offered us for a second night.  Dan continued to be involved, and when the church canceled giving those two reasons, Dan offered two options: to move the concert to a different venue, or to keep it at the church, removing the musical aspect of the evening and turning it into spoken presentations by the three of us- Dan, Gilad, and myself.

No noise. The church turned him down, proving that the rabbi’s objection was the one and only reason for the cancellation.  The church was clearly determined to just shut down the event, and was not interested in options, and I have e mails indicating exactly that.

Dan and I had a conversation and agreed that we should organize an e mail and telephone campaign.  I’m good at that, so I spread the word and people started making communications.  A friend of mine, Emman Chehade Randazzo, a Palestinian woman married to an American and living in Chicago, telephoned John Keevert, chair of the Social Justice Council.  He was one of the two people involved in both the booking and the cancellation, the other being Ron Johnson of the church. 

 (I’m not sure if the council is part of the church or a separate entity.)  John Keevert took Emman’s call, and explained to her that he had heard some very disturbing things about Atzmon (evidently from the rabbi).  Emman communicated to me that he said, basically, that Atzmon is a Jewish Anti-Semite.   This was significant because it made it clear that the people we were dealing with had been influenced by propaganda, and it was not just the rabbi’s objection that caused the cancellation but it had evolved into a situation where it had become, through the rabbi, our own host’s objection.

I got in touch with Atzmon and communicated the situation to him.  He in turn called Keever and explained that he is often quoted with “cherry-picked” quotes taken out of context, and was able to convince Keever that he is not an Anti-Semite and that it would be very bad indeed to cave into pressure from Zionists. 

 I wasn’t privy to the conversation but all of a sudden we were back on, at another venue, but still hosted by the church and the Social Justice Council.  And it seems from the character of subsequent conversations that our hosts have returned to being as enthusiastic as they previously had been. It seems that they came to a realization of some sort, probably that the rabbi was part of an agenda that they don’t want to support.

‘NYT’ makes excuses for Netanyahu

Posted: 27 Jun 2010

Can it be a coincidence that just as Netanyahu is about to visit Obama, reports surface that the the un-frozen settlement ‘freeze’ continues in robust fashion (“Construction begins on 20 homes in Sheikh Jarrah”).

I’m not a prophet, but I’m going to guess that this, too, will be chalked up to bureaucratic snafus that Netanyahu had no control over or knowledge of.

And I wonder if that excuse/explanation will make it into the NYT lede if/when they choose to report this. I always appreciate tips on how to think about news developments in the Middle East.

Oh: Isabel Kershner in the NYT:

another example of an awkwardly timed, seemingly bureaucratic Israeli maneuver that could upset fragile peace efforts.

Long predicted, Goldberg’s eclipse finally begins

Posted: 27 Jun 2010

Everyone’s talking about this post by Glenn Greenwald on Jeffrey Goldberg’s journalistically-disastrous performance in the buildup to the Iraq war. Greenwald puts more fuel on a fire that can only be built now, when that tragic decision is in the past, about why we made the mistake. He know that this has to do with “Israel-obsessive devotees” like Goldberg. Showing that the left understands, we can’t get past the Iraq war without talking about the occupation. 

unlike [Judith] Miller, who was forced to leave the New York Times over what she did, and the NYT itself, which at least acknowledged some of the shoddy pro-war propaganda it churned out, Goldberg has never acknowledged his journalistic errors, expressed remorse for them, or paid any price at all.  To the contrary, as is true for most Iraq war propagandists, he thrived despite as a result of his sorry record in service of the war. 

In 2007, David Bradley — the owner of The Atlantic and (in his own words) formerly “a neocon guy” who was “dead certain about the rightness” of invading Iraq  — lavished Goldberg with money and gifts, including ponies for Goldberg’s children, in order to lure him away from The New Yorker, where he had churned out most of his pre-war trash.  

One of his most obscenely false and damaging articles — this 2002 museum of deceitful, hideous journalism, “reporting” on Saddam’s “possible ties to Al Qaeda” — actually won an Oversea’s Press Award for — get this — “best international reporting in a print medium dealing with human rights.”  Goldberg, whose devotion to Israel is so extreme that he served in the IDF as a prison guard over Palestinians and was described last year as “Netanyahu’s faithful stenographer” by The New York Times’ Roger Cohen, wrote an even more falsehood-filled 2002 New Yorker article, warning that Hezbollah was planning a master, Legion-of-Doom alliance with Saddam Hussein for a “larger war,” and that “[b]oth Israel and the United States believe that, at the outset of an American campaign against Saddam, Iraq will fire missiles at Israel — perhaps with chemical or biological payloads — in order to provoke an Israeli conventional, or even nuclear, response,” though — Goldberg sternly warned — “Hezbollah, which is better situated than Iraq to do damage to Israel, might do Saddam’s work itself” and “its state sponsors, Iran and Syria, maintain extensive biological- and chemical-weapons programs.” 

That fantastical, war-fueling screed — aimed at scaring Americans into targeting the full panoply of Israel’s enemies — actually won a National Magazine Award in 2003.  Given how completely discredited those articles are, those are awards which any person with an iota of shame would renounce and apologize for, but Goldberg continues to proudly tout them on his bio page at The Atlantic.

Despite all of those war-cheerleading deceits — or, again, because of them — Goldberg continues to be held out by America’s most establishment outlets as a preeminent expert in the region.

See: www.mondoweiss.net

 

Posted in Uncategorized0 Comments

YOU TOO DUMB TO WRITE ABOUT PALESTINE?

NOVANEWS

hey Eric didn’t I tell you you were too dumb to write about Palestine?

I have just seen Eric Alterman’s response to the response to the Nation’s cool-tempered editorial on the massacre on the Mavi Marmara:

You know, it’s funny. Israel, Egypt and the Palestinian Authority are all engaged in this blockade (which I strongly oppose). But if you read The Nation’s editorial on the topic, “Free Gaza,” you’d have to assume that they are all doing this because it’s fun, or because they are big meanies or, at best, for no reason at all.

Never mind priorities, that the siege in intolerable and must end. Never mind reality, which is that Israel is engaged in a terroristic blockade to overthrow a democratically elected government. Never mind that Egypt complies because it does what America and Israel tell it to do, or that Fatah complies because its policy-making component is populated by a group of collaborators who do whatever Israel tells them to do.

Never mind that senior Israeli officials openly admitted that the blockade was a failed policy on its stated terms, and that they kept it in place in the face of the flotilla to assert the inviolable principle that Israel will not give in to resistance, because they are the boss—or, in Alterman’s cutesy rhetoric, precisely because they are “meanies.” Never mind that pace Hamas’s charter it’s not a particularly anti-Semitic political movement in practice, nor is it opposed to “liberalism in all its forms,” since it has repeatedly attempted to sign reconciliation agreements that would have created a legislative council with representation from both Hamas and Fatah, while impossible Fatah demands scuppered them.

Alterman is afflicted with a serious case of White Liberalism. This disease turns the pseudo-intellectual into a very picky consumer of resistance movements. Not that one, they have funky red beards, and those folk aren’t very nice to their brown women, who we do the honor of bombing without gender discrimination. This complex suggests that resistance movements must fit into the box we construct—white, secular, liberal, Western—to receive principled, unqualified support for ending the suffering of the groups on whose behalf they resist.

None do.

Hamas doesn’t have to placate Alterman’s audience at the 92nd Street Y in order to justify ending the suffering of the people who voted for it, any more than those expressing sympathy for American suffering on 9/11 and who were concerned about its causes needed to quibble about the fact that America was a barbaric country that executed children, condones penal rape, and in which half the population believes the Earth is around 6,000 years old before saying so.

Such facts are irrelevant except to those who think that Palestinian suffering must be gingerly framed to be sure not to offend American Zionist sensibilities. This is racist anti-universalist thinking, and it’s intolerable and even “illiberal.”

Reading Eric, you think that perhaps he saw Senator Ribbentrop Schumer speaking in front of the Orthodox Union and decided that so long as he was several picometers to the left of a call for outright “strangulation” of the Palestinians in Gaza he could grandstand about the “complications of the conflict.” Eric, here are the complications: American Zionists have been indoctrinated with a victimization complex from a tragedy that almost none of directly experienced.

We think our people died because we were weak, intellectual, effeminate. We think the solution, more psycho-social than practical, is a fascist Sparta in the Middle East, because none of us go to live there except the haredim from Williamsburg and Borough Park.

That Sparta does good work for the Empire, its intellectual backers in Brooklyn collect money from the Empire, their egos are assuaged, and the merry-round keeps going round and round, while Israel descends into madness and Palestinians are more and more mired in misery and hopelessness, and the Erics of the world prance around podiums in New York, so distant imaginatively, morally, and intellectually from the conflict that it becomes totally clear that the people living there—the Jewish Israelis too, living in a fantastically unequal racist society—aren’t even the point.

The point is positioning within a native community, the point is social status to be gained by transcribing and condensing the consensus of that community rather than challenging it. And who cares that Israel prevented oxygen machines from coming into Gaza this week, or that Gazans can’t leave for medical treatment? Not them, for sure, despite not even remotely convincing parenthetical avowals of concern.

 

Technorati Tags: Alterman, American Liberal Zionism, American Zionism, Eric Alterman, Gaza, Israel, Jewish, Palestine, Zionism

Related posts:

  1. Hey Eric Write about Cast Lead or the Gaza Freedom March So I am sitting here, pro­cras­ti­nat­ing in the face of…
  2. Thomas Friedman: Dumber than Dumb So Thomas Friedman has pumped out another piece on the…
  3. Avishai and Grossman at Sheikh Jarrah? Write a novel about it I guess the Sheikh Jarrah protests are really swelling. So…
  4. Eric is Pathetic So while I sit around in Cairo anxiously waiting for…
  5. On a Bus to J Street! As I tap this out I am on a bus…

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized0 Comments

BOYCOTT MOMENTUM

[Teaser] Is the whole world against us?

[Headline] European Parliament: “Phenomenon of boycotts against Israel gaining momentum”

[Sub-headline] Members of the European lobby for Israel warn: The deterioration in the political climate is increasing boycotts of Israeli products, companies and businessmen; requested that Peres utilize his stature and appear before the European Parliament

David Lipkin, Maariv, June 28 2010 [page 4 of business section; Hebrew original here and at bottom of post]

 

The leaders of European Friends of Israel (EFI), the European lobby for Israel and its economy, warned yesterday of a deterioration in the political climate in Europe against Israel, and an increase in the phenomenon of boycotts of Israeli products and businesspeople throughout Europe.  They noted that there was a growing phenomenon of European investment funds that were divesting from Israeli companies, for reasons defined as “business ethics.”

Ronny Bruckner, leader of the lobby, which includes members of Parliament in the European Union and senior European businesspeople, asked President Shimon Peres yesterday to use his unique international standing and appear before the European Parliament.  Bruckner also asked the president to step up his activity vis-à-vis the EU institutions and to invest in smaller European states, which have recently joined the EU.

Bruckner noted that the significantly expanding Arab population in the large European countries might help Muslim bodies join radical coalitions and boycott products from Israel, not only those produced east of the Green Line.  He said that Arab activists have already taken to harassing Israeli businessmen and that recently, companies that engage in business ties with Israeli companies have received threats.

Senior EFI officials told President Shimon Peres that there is an expanding trend whereby European investment funds declare they are pulling out their investments in Israeli companies, citing reasons such as “business ethics.”  There is fear, the officials warned, that the phenomenon will expand further.

EFI CEO Michelle Gorari told Asakim that the economic boycott against Israel is accelerating in Europe in view of the recent political developments.  He believes that in view of the rising pressures, the boycott against Israeli exports might affect some 30% of Israel’s exports to Europe.  There is a dangerous trend that aims at imposing a total ban on the sale of Israeli products on certain European markets.

Gorari pointed out that the pro-Israeli lobby has managed to foil an emerging trend whereby the European Parliament intended not to ratify a new aviation agreement between Israel and the EU.  After EFI made efforts to gain support for Israel, the agreement was approved by a majority of 465 against 65.  They are currently considering whether it is the right time to ask the European Parliament to approve an agreement on the harmonization of standards between Israel and the EU because there is a fear that, given the current anti-Israeli atmosphere, it may be hard to attain a majority that would approve it.

Posted in Uncategorized0 Comments

MUD & HOPE IN SOUTH HEBRON

Ezra Nawi, after a day in the mud
NOVANEWS: June 26, 2010   Bi’r el-’Id

There’s a strange beauty in the viscous black mud that comes up from the depths of the earth, from the bottom, or somewhere near the bottom, of the well we are cleaning in Bi’r al-’Id. Bucket after bucket of it, lifted by pulley from down below, straggles to the surface, where we unload it and pour it out on the rocky escarpment. Its texture changes remarkably over the long morning hours from a watery top layer to heavy, shiny dark loam to a granular, sticky brown.

It has a strong smell, like the sulphurous mud from the Dead Sea (not very far away) that people smear over their bodies for healing. Yehuda says the Palestinians of Bi’r al-’Id should bottle it and sell it at the airport: “Sacred Mud from the Sacred Desert.” There’s no end to it. The buckets go down and up, down and up, heavier each time; the rope attached to the pulley is now caked solid with mud, and the escarpment has turned into a mire. Amiel, Dolev, and Danny are down in the dark recesses, filling the buckets alongside Haj Isma’il. Suddenly Ezra arrives—he was released from jail only a few days ago—and immediately lowers himself, like Spider Man, down the shaft.

You can’t stop him. When they emerge hours later, they are black troglodytes, covered with mud from head to toe; and we, too, working the buckets above ground, are splattered, encrusted, soaked.

When I said goodbye to Amiel almost five months ago, he said, “We will meet in the spring, and when you get back, things will be the same here, just a little worse.” But actually in some ways they’re a lot worse. The continuing struggles against the occupation, on the ground in the territories, take their usual grim course, but inside Israel hardly a day passes without some new and sickening jolt.

The country is in the grip of violent nationalist paranoia spiked with inventive forms of wickedness and active hatred for Palestinians, of an intensity I’ve never seen before. Here, for example, is what Yulia Shalamov Berkovitch, a member of the Knesset (from the Kadima “centrist” party), has to say: “”Israeli academia apparently suffers from ‘Palestinomania,’ a mild psychological illness whose symptoms include self-hatred, an affinity for Israel’s enemies, Jewish anti-Semitism and/or anti-Zionism.

The spread of ‘Palestinomania’ demands the immediate and painful treatment for all of our sake, and the sooner the better” (Haaretz, June 21).  I wonder what treatment she has in mind:  Lobotomies? Re-education camps? Firing squads? In the same report, we learned that the Minister of Education, Gideon Sa’ar, thinks that it is “important to examine the issues” raised by a rabidly right-wing group called Im Tirtzu in a report on “anti-Zionist trends” in Israeli universities. According to Im Tirtzu, 80% of the reading materials assigned in the departments of Political Science in Israel are anti-Zionist and anti-nationalist and should, one must assume, be banned.

They seem to have a black list, which no doubt includes the works of Rousseau, Plato, and John Rawls. The minister, whom some once saw as relatively enlightened, apparently goes along with this. The next step, I suppose, is censorship in the classroom, followed by book burnings in the public square.

Milder signs of the times are everywhere; the mayor of Ramat Hasharon in the coastal plain has decreed that in all schools that require a uniform, the pupils, from next year on, will have to tie Israeli flags to their wrists. He must feel, perversely, that  a lack of patriotism is eating away at the foundations of our national existence.

Add to this the decision by Jerusalem’s mayor Barkat to demolish 22 Palestinian houses in Silwan—the same homes we saved by an international campaign in 2005—and the ongoing, indeed escalating evictions of Palestinian families from their homes in Sheikh Jarrah. Barkat seems intent on setting the city on fire.

But here we are in Bi’r el-’Id, where our Palestinian hosts are, miraculously, rebuilding the homes from which they were cruelly evicted over a decade ago. The sun is dancing, the wind fierce for a summer day, the sky endlessly open like the human heart at its best, like the desert stretching toward the horizon just below us. I ask my friend Muhammad how things have been during my absence.

 “Fine,” he says; “no problems.” Afterwards I hear that his father was recently assaulted by Yaakov Talya, the notorious settler-owner of the ranch aptly named Lucifer’s Farm, hardly half a mile away; when the soldiers turned up, they of course arrested Muhammad’s father. He is now awaiting trial. (Perhaps the military judges will send him to jail for the crime of having been attacked, as they have so many others we know.) And the road to Jinba, which we can see from our perch on the high ridge, has again been closed by the army after we punched it open with a water convoy last fall.

Not long ago a boy from Jinba was seriously injured and had to be carried all the way up the mountain to the road near Bi’r el-’Id. Two weeks ago settlers from Chavat Maon entered Palestinian Twaneh, threw rocks at the villagers, and tried to set a Palestinian house on fire. In short:  Plus ça change….

Yet mud-stained, back aching, thirsty, I surprise myself today. I am borne along on a wave of irrational, happy hope. I have missed these weekends in South Hebron—missed the people, the Arabic, the desert landscapes, maybe even the danger. Each moment we spend here has its own irreducible value. Each act of defiant friendship is self-fulfilling, self-delighting.

There it is again, that odd, unpredictable happiness, the heady wine of inner freedom. Yesterday we marched in protest in Silwan—some 500 ordinary Israelis doing the simple, the decent thing—and at first I was wondering where the Palestinians were (most were standing at their windows and doors and watching us), and my colleague Yossi Zeira said to me: “This is our task. No one will do it for us.

Every good action counts and adds to the pressure. Slowly they will add up and bring change.” Alan, walking beside me, said he had felt tired after a day at work and almost didn’t come, and then he remembered a phrase from the end of Stephen Poliakoff’s film “1939″: “It is when the good people, or even those who are only half-good, remain silent that evil flourishes.”  And there are moments of still deeper insight.

When Eileen heard the rhymed slogan we’ve been chanting—”Ein kedusha be’ir kvushah, There is No Sanctity in an Occupied City”—she said: “Maybe there is sanctity only in an occupied city.” I think she’s right. Nothing in my experience comes as close to the meaning of a word like “holy” as the act of protest against what the municipality and the police are doing in Palestinian East Jerusalem.

That’s also what Istvan tells me as we work the buckets by the well. He’s a religious man, and to him these Ta’ayush hours in South Hebron are what religion is all about:  truth, for example, and loving-kindness. “The settlers think that they represent the true Judaism,” I say to him, “and sometimes I’m afraid they may be right.” “No,” he says, “they are certainly wrong.”

At moments a great simplicity emerges in the mind, like cleaning a muddy well, and you taste a giddy seriousness, a sudden lightening of the heart. Sitting beside us is Ziad Muhamra, shot point-blank in the face by a soldier some years ago when Ziad refused to take his goats off his ancestral grazing grounds. He told me his story last time I was here. Ziad survived, thanks to a devoted Israeli surgeon. He was in hospital for a year, fed by tubes. Today he remembers happily the moment he ate solid food again for the first time—a banana.

It took him half an hour to eat it, and the whole ward, the nurses and the doctors and the other patients, all gathered round to watch this astonishing event. Now he has come back to Bi’r el-’Id. When he mentions his doctor, searching for the foreign Hebrew name, it seems to me, for a second, as if this tough shepherd from the desert, a true survivor, is close to tears.

But some things are simpler than others. ‘Id has joined us today; we embrace like brothers when I see him. But his life in the village is perhaps no longer viable. People envy him—he is educated, articulate, self-possessed—and some don’t like the fact that he has Israeli friends. A few days ago Palestinians came to Umm al-Khair and tried to kill him; he managed to get away. He has a wife and a baby daughter, and it’s not clear where he can go; he’d like to study somewhere in Europe.

He’s good with his hands, artistic by nature. Maybe we’ll be able to help him. Then there is Haj Isma’il, with his 33 children from four wives. How will he manage to support this huge tribe from his tent in the tiny, precarious khirbeh of Bi’r el-’Id? He wanted to take a fifth wife, but the Qadi wouldn’t allow it, not even when Haj Isma’il tried to persuade him he’d already divorced the first wife. “I still have my strength,” he says, “and I don’t want to waste it or take it with me to the grave.”

“So how was jail?” I ask Ezra when he emerges from the well. “Akhla—great,” he says; “highly recommended.” He was imprisoned for a month after Judge Eilata Ziskind found him guilty of attacking a police officer during house demolitions at Umm al-Khair, where ‘Id lives. 

I have no doubt that the charge was cooked up by the police in order to punish a central figure in the non-violent resistance to the occupation. The first week in jail, in Jerusalem, was hard; they refused to allow him to receive books, so he went on hunger strike—for four days he ate nothing, until the prison authorities relented. Afterwards he was transferred to Dekel Prison in Beer-Sheva, where things improved.

The cell was filthy, he says, and infested with cockroaches who paid no heed to human attempts to drive them away; they slept with him in his bed, emerged from his towel when he showered. One day he asked the commanding officer: “Are these part of the menu or part of the punishment?” He found a 50-meter stretch of corridor where he was allowed to walk, and every day he would pace it up and down, for hours.

He lost a lot of weight. But there’s no trace of bitterness in him—quite the contrary, today he seems to me at peace, and full of hope. At lunch I say to him, “I hear you’re feeling optimistic.” He laughs. “Yes. Just look around. Two years ago we didn’t even know the name of this place. These people had been driven off their land, the houses and terraces were destroyed, the wells stopped up.

Now we’ve brought them back and stood by them, and we’ve helped them to stand up to the settlers and the soldiers and not to be afraid. They are here to stay. They are home.

You can train people so they become able to resist. Even a few people like that make a huge difference. In the end we will win. So of course I’m optimistic. You must be optimistic, too, otherwise why would you be here?”

•More Recent Articles

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized0 Comments

INVITATION

NOVANEWS

Event: Home, Identity and Citizenship – The Films of Philip Donnellan.

What? You are invited to attend a screening of ‘Philip Donnellan’s The Colony’ (1964), and a discussion of an ongoing project to explore and promote the resources of the Philip Donnellan Archive.

The Colony: This innovative TV documentary explores the experience of members of the Caribbean migrant community in Birmingham and the Midlands. The film allows its subjects space to candidly evaluate their reception in the UK and their relationships with home and other migrant workers. Controversial at the time of its original broadcast the film is an enduring and powerful document of a key moment in post-war British history.

When? 6-8pm 30th June 2010

Where? Birmingham Library Theatre (http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/librarytheatre).

Who is this event for? Everyone is welcome but the event is particularly aimed at those with an interest in the social history of the region, post-war migration and community, documentary film and the BBC. We want to contact educators, heritage and community groups and researchers who will find Donnellan’s archive useful and who might aid in finding ways of preserving it and promoting its use as a resource for the social and cultural history of the region.

Biography: Philip Donnellan (1924-99) worked for the BBC from 1948-84. Much of his professional life was spent in the Midlands where he worked first in radio and then in television. His work expressed his belief in the value of ordinary life and culture and the need to give working people and underrepresented social minorities a space in which to articulate their concerns in their own voices. Many of this films

The project: Philip Donnellan’s un-catalogued archive is held in the Birmingham Archives and contains an extensive range of film, audio and print material pertaining to his career with the BBC and the works he made in and about the region. An award from Screen West Midlands has allowed the employment of an archive worker to assess these deposits. As a result, we are already finding rich materials such as unbroadcast films, oral histories and programme research materials.

More information: Details of Donnellan’s life and work can be found at the

‘Friends of Philip Donnellan’ website:  http://www.philipdonnellan.co.uk

Subscribe to the posterous site: http://philipdonnellan.posterous.com/

Join the Facebook group: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=394637709622&ref=ts

Help? Please pass this invitation on to your networks and to those who may find the project to be of interest. If you are interested but cannot make the event, let us know and we’ll keep you informed of developments and available resources. If you can get an audience together and find a venue, we’ll be glad to come and show some of the films to you and talk about the project.

RSVP: If you wish to attend, please forward your details to:

donnellanphilip@googlemail.com

Postal address:

          Dr Paul Long

Reader in Media and Cultural History

Birmingham School of Media

BCU

B42 2SU

Who is involved? The project is funded by Screen West Midlands and managed by a partnership of Birmingham Archives and Heritage, Media Archive Central England (MACE) and Birmingham Centre for Media and Cultural Research, Birmingham City University.

Ian M Parr
Hon Secretary and Trustee of the Charles Parker Archive
10 Oakfield Close,  Bronington,  Whitchurch
Shropshire
SY13 3GZ
tel:  01948 780167, mobile:  0796 617 0746
cpatrustsecretary@googlemail.com  or  Ianmparr@gmail.com

The Charles Parker Archive is deposited in the Birmingham City Archives on the 6th Floor of the Central Library.
Charles Parker Archive Trust, registered charity no. 326082
http://www.cpatrust.org.uk

Posted in Uncategorized0 Comments

SILO NATION

NOVANEWS

Max Dunbar writes lucidly and in this particular piece takes on localism and the issue of immigration in a very persuasive fashion:

“During the late 1990s and early 2000s there was a lot of buzz about an economics writer called Thomas Friedman. Friedman was the Pangloss of globalisation. His books and journalism constituted one breathless paean to global free markets – an endless parade of twenty-year-old dotcom millionaires interviewed in Singapore coffee houses.

There’s one passage where he has his shoes shined by an elderly beggar woman, and then speculates on her pride at being able to contribute to the global economy – written in prose so self-satisfied that Francis Wheen wondered how the woman restrained herself from punching him in the face.

Post-crash, Friedman’s work seems strikingly naive. In the protectionist backlash people are increasingly suspicious of globalism. The average UK citizen wants more immigration control, troops pulled out of Afghanistan, withdrawal from the EU and locally sourced food.

Read the comment threads on any national or regional newspaper website and you’ll find our collective dream is of a silo nation: nothing gets in, nothing gets out.

For localism has a dark side. As well as Prince Charles’s babble about British cheese subsidies and supermarket regulation it has produced a fierce hostility to migrants. People think of economics as zero sum.

 Let too many migrants into the UK, they reason, and soon there won’t be enough food or money for the rest of us. If a migrant gets a job, someone else must lose theirs. If a migrant applies for housing benefit, it goes straight out of your paycheque. It is fair to say that loathing of immigrants has become a national pathology.”

Posted in Uncategorized0 Comments

Join our mailing list

* = required field

Facebook

Archives