Archive | January 9th, 2011



People have been asking me what I think of the Gaza Youth Breaks Out statement. Here are my thoughts, pro­vi­sion­ally; I’m still asking around. The youth who wrote that document could face con­se­quences, and they were brave to have written it. There is a lot in the document that anyone should agree with. It expresses certain shared frustrations here. There are also unfor­tu­nate equiv­a­lences acci­den­tally implied that good people, including the manifesto’s authors, should reject, and have abjured.

Fateh bureau­crats live lux­u­ri­ously in Ramallah, while Bedouin in Gaza struggle for wells to draw undrink­able water from the Strip’s dying aquifer, and Israeli soldiers gun down sleeping Pales­tin­ian men in Hebron and Israeli snipers shoot shepherds in the back in Beit Lehiya.

Those who make martyrs are not equiv­a­lent to the gov­ern­ment that avenges them. Whatever problems—some under­stand­able—people have with the Hamas gov­ern­ment, it was Hamas militia who were murdered defending their country during the Cast Lead attack, and I am sure that the authors of the manifesto are aware of this.

Their Pales­tin­ian critics certainly are.The statement has attracted attention both from eager pro­gres­sives and leftists peering at Palestine, and from the Zionist media and Israeli youth who have fixated on the manifesto’s opening line and probably ignored too much of the rest of it, as they ignore students’ letters that lack that beguil­ingly profane beginning. As Israeli has­barais­tas know, wars are also mediatic, and they pay attention to the dis­gruntle­ment of the natives when it’s con­ve­nient, not because they care.

For activists for Palestine and those otherwise intensely concerned with the lib­er­a­tion struggle here, attention is under­stand­able. For others, there’s more than a bit of colonial voyeurism visible: look at them look how they hate their gov­ern­ment look how they hate the Islamists they are secular we are secular maybe they’re pro-Israel a nascent PA? The group’s message board is filled with racist joy that some people within Gaza are crit­i­ciz­ing Hamas.

If those people cared, perhaps they’d pay attention to theexchanges between the gov­ern­ment and the Inde­pen­dent Com­mis­sion on Human Rights, or to the work of the PCHR. They never do. The people who wrote the manifesto know the dif­fer­ence between sup­port­ers and those mas­querad­ing as sup­port­ers, and few here are so stupid to confuse the two. There is a big dif­fer­ence between the gov­ern­ment that shuts down Sharek and the gov­ern­ment that has penned them into the last ghetto, and they know that.

An older friend told me he thinks the manifesto will blow over. Maybe, but maybe not. To me, the manifesto is important because of what it conveys: frus­tra­tion, and a wish for change. No one writes such a dangerous manifesto just as catharsis, and the way it has moved through the English-reading Pales­tin­ian uni­ver­sity community cannot be read as just an upper-class fad, espe­cially since that community cuts across class and religious lines.

I know kids from the camps who have enthused about the document, and religious people from poverty-struck families who have done the same. Frus­tra­tion with the political horizon is not restricted to the rich here, desperate to live debauched lives like their peers in the West. One student writes, “Our feelings of despair, irri­ta­tion and resent­ment are the same” as those who drafted the manifesto, admon­ish­ing them for not making it better. And it will be re-written. The authors have already released a clar­i­fy­ing statement.

They are not dumb, and know which sparkles caught the eye of their tor­men­tors to the north and west, and it wasn’t the stuff about “fuck Israel.” Meanwhile, it has inspired debate—where’s the political vision? Where’s the call for tactical sol­i­dar­ity? Why no mention of BDS? Why the hint of nihilism?–and that’s good, because we never know which spark will set off fiery revolt, which enraged polemic will make people think through the steps required to get unity, something that won’t come from above–it’ll come from below.

We cannot but barely directly affect the internal dynamics of mobi­liza­tion of Pales­tin­ian society. Those who care will critique, highlight, tend, support, fund, hope, struggle, and all the while, do our best to overthrow our own gov­ern­ments, the most important work we can do to support the people of Palestine, be they Hamas or Fateh or neither, keeping front and center that this is an anti-colonial struggle—the last one—and that while Gaza remains a ghetto we all live in a world of walls.

Technorati Tags: 

Related posts:


  1. Gaza Diary, day 13: seeds of the next Intifada? Gaza from a distance is quiet, bestilled, stuck in political…

  2. Between four governments* Randomly, from Ma’an News: the Hamas gov­ern­ment in Gaza banned…

  3. “targeted assassinations,” in Gaza, again I meant to write about this earlier but forgot. Several…

  4. the Lobby is powerful, but not all powerful Perhaps the most bizarre thing about attempts to really analyze…

  5. the blackouts in Gaza are over, for the moment I didn’t know before I came to Gaza how laptop…


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





Posted by: Sammi Ibrahem

Chair of West Midland PSC


Dear Friends,

Tonight a rather long message.  Sorry, that’s the way things go.  Sometimes there is more news than at other times.  The final item (item 10) is a link to a video of about 8 minutes on the conflation of anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism.  Worth watching even if you are not new to the subject, and definitely worth distributing widely.

The lead item is on the recognition of Palestine within the ’67 borders by more South American states, and the expectation of yet more to follow.

Item 2 is about today’s destruction of the Shepherd hotel in the Sheikh Jarrah district of East Jerusalem, and the plan to construct in its place and in the area 20 units for Jews—a move that obviously distresses Palestinians.  Will this begin another intifada?  I hope not.  Israel would love to have the Palestinians become violent.  Israel knows how to deal with violence.  It uses more force.  Israel also deals with non-violent protest, but not with as deadly force as when it fights violence.

Following the report on the event is an update informing us that the “EU denounces Israel’s demolition of Sheikh Jarrah hotel.”  Very good, and indeed the EU and the rest of the world should denounce.  But unfortunately that is not enough. Actions speak much louder than words.  Had the EU accompanied its criticism with sanctions of one sort or another, then it would have been something!

In item 3 the UN warns that Israel intends to make life more difficult for Palestinians by new border controls.  Never mind that till now Israel has not settled where its borders between itself and the Palestinians are.  The controls will be put in regardless.

Items 4 and 5 are about Jawalier Abu Rahme, killed by tear gas at a protest against the route of the wall in Bil’in.  In item 4 her family absolutely disputes the IOF’s attempts to wiggle out of its responsibility for her death.  In item 5 Gideon Levy calls the IOF’s lies about her for what they are: propaganda.

Item 6 relates that there is an academic boycott of  Ariel college in the colony of Ariel.  I appreciate their sentiment, but it is somewhat hypocritical.  After all, on whose land were Israel’s other universities built?

Items 7, 8, and 9 are more or less on one and the same subject: the Knesset’s decision to set up a Parliamentary committee to probe Human Rights organizations funding sources.  In item 7 Israeli intellectuals decry the setting up of the committee. In item 8 Jewish Peace news discredits it.  And in item 9 Zvi Bar’el terms the parliamentary committee “Israel’s very own Revolutionary Guards.”

All the best,



1. Jerusalem Post,

January 9, 2011

Photo by: AP

More nations will recognize Palestinian state, PA says

[see also Al Jazeera on the event]



After Chile’s recognition, Jerusalem worried other Latin American countries will follow suit; statement doesn’t mention pre-’67 borders

Israel fears that most, if not all, Latin American countries will have recognized a Palestinian state by mid-February.

On Friday, Chile became the fifth Latin American country in the last month to recognize a Palestinian state. It followed recognition of Palestinian statehood by  Brazil, Argentina, Bolivia and Ecuador.


South American countries recognize Palestinian state

Latin America: Southern discomfort

Uruguay was expected to make a similar declaration in the coming weeks. One Israeli official said he feared that the trend of such recognitions would now seem “irresistible” to other Latin American countries.

“We expect that all the [Latin American] countries who have already recognized a PA state to put pressure on those who have not done so,” the official said.

He added he believed that most, if not all, Latin American countries would recognize a Palestinian state by the time the a summit of Latin American and Arab countries was held in mid-February in Peru.

About 100 other countries world wide have recognized Palestinian statehood — most after Palestinians declared “independence” in 1988, and a few others, mostly former Soviet republics, did so after the 1993 Oslo peace accords. In recent years, Venezuela (2005) and Costa Rica (2008) also provided recognition.

According to the Foreign Ministry, Cuba and Nicaragua also gave past recognition to a Palestinian state.

Palestinians in the last month have preferred to push for unilateral recognition of their state rather than engage in direct negotiations with Israel for a two-state solution.

Fledgling talks between Israel and the Palestinians were held in September, but broke down when Israel did not renew its 10-month moratorium on new settlement construction.

Chilean Foreign Minister Alfredo Moreno said his country is following UN resolutions with its decision to recognize the existence of the state of Palestine as “a free, independent and sovereign state, coexisting in peace with the State of Israel.”

Chile’s decision follows a meeting in Brazil between Chilean President Sebastian Pinera and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, who has been lobbying his Latin American counterparts to show their support.

Chile, whose Palestinian population of about 400,000 is among the largest outside the Arab world, also had been lobbied intensely by Israeli representatives.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu called the Chilean president a number of weeks ago and asked him not to take such a stand.

The Prime Minister’s Office and the Foreign Ministry did not issue a response. But Israeli officials warned that such declarations were harmful to the peace process because it reinforces the Palestinian belief that they do not need to negotiate.

Netanyahu has continually called to the Palestinians to enter direct negotiations. The Palestinians in turn have refused to do so unless Israel halts all settlement activity.

Palestinian Authority Foreign Minister Riad Malki recently told The Associated Press that his government’s aim was to persuade more countries to endorse the 1967 boundaries.

“We are making efforts so that the rest of the countries will first recognize a Palestinian state in the ’67 borders and secondly raise the level of Palestinian diplomatic representation to that of an embassy,” he told the AP.

But Chile’s move on Friday said only that it supported a Palestinian state, but did follow that statement with a show of support for the pre-1967 boundary.

Chile added that it “has completely supported the right of the state of Israel to exist within secure and internationally recognized frontiers.”

Recognizing pre-1967 borders for a Palestinian state could undermine Chile’s own position in a dispute over its maritime border with Peru, now before the International Court of Justice in the Hague. Chile maintains that the border was established by treaty after an 1879 war in which Chile seized a large slice of southern Peru and left Bolivia landlocked, and should not now be changed.

The government’s resolution also noted that both Jewish and Palestinian communities have been key to Chile’s social, cultural, political and economic development for many years, working in harmony that should serve as a model for their both the Israeli and Palestinian states. It’s a message that Pinera plans to make personally during a visit to the Middle East in March.

Gabriel Zaliasnik, president of Chile’s Jewish community, said he was “satisfied” with the wording of the proclamation because it did not refer to borders.

“Israelis and Palestinians will eventually define all the core issues like borders,” he said. ‘For the Jewish people, Jerusalem and borders of the state of Israel can not be provided to third parties.”

Unlike the five previous Latin American countries which have recognized a Palestinian state in the past three months, including Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Bolivia and Ecuador, Chile has a right-leaning government whose politics are not necessarily critical of the US, and by extension, of Israel.

Separately on Saturday, the PA renewed its call to the EU to recognize a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders.

“The European position must be developed from the phase of issuing very good statements rejecting settlements and calling for the establishment of a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital to recognizing such as state on the 1967 borders,” said Nimer Hammad, political advisor to PA President Mahmoud Abbas.

“This is a very important issue because it will boost the peace process remarkably. In addition, it would put pressure on Israel,” Hammad said.

To date, the European Union has consistently said that direct negotiations are the best way to achieve a two-state solution.

AP contributed to this report.


2. Ynet,

January 09, 2011

East Jerusalem

‘Chance for peace ruined together with hotel’

Israelis, Palestinians gather outside Shepherd Hotel compound in east Jerusalem as bulldozers tear building down in preparation for construction of housing units for Jewish residents.”It’s like tearing down Hitler’s home,” says right-eing activist, while Palestinian Sheikh Jarrah resident describes sight as ‘demolition of chance for peace with Israel’,7340,L-4011141,00.html

Yair Altman

Residents of the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood in east Jerusalem woke up Sunday morning to the sound of bulldozers. Looking out their windows they saw cranes and heavy machinery demolishing the old Shepherd Hotel compound which has recently become another point of contention in the already tense neighborhood.

The building originally served as the home of Jerusalem Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini who was known for his ties with Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler. After the Six Day War, the building served as a Border Guard HQ before being purchased by Jewish-American businessman Irwin Moskowitz 25 years ago. A plan to build a Jewish neighborhood in the site has prompted criticism which extended all the way to Washington.

Half of the building was demolished Sunday. The remaining part is meant to serve the construction project which has attracted many journalists, Ateret Cohanim activists as well as Palestinians including Adnan Al Husseini, the Palestinian-appointed governor of Jerusalem. The Al Aqsa Mosque Mufti also arrived at the site, which did not see any riots.

Daniel Luria, a member of Ateret Cohanim – a group promoting Jewish settlement in Jerusalem, also visited the site and could hardly contain his satisfaction with the work being performed. “These sounds are special. It’s like destroying Hitler or Himler’s home,” he says. “Haj Amin al-Husseini collaborated with the Nazis and set up a Muslim department which was responsible for the murder of 90% of Yugoslavia’s Jews. This man wanted to kill any Jew who lived in Israel and therefore nothing is more just and satisfying than demolishing this house,” he says.

Demolition works at the Shepherd Hotel compound (Photo: Noam Moskowitz)

Any claims made against the construction at the site Luria rejects out of hand. “Jews purchased this land in a lawful manner. There are those who say it’s an Arab area, but we are near Ramat Eshkol, the French Hill and Mount Scopus. It’s the heart of a Jewish zone and that is why there is no reason to prevent Jews who purchased this land lawfully to build their homes here.”

Adnan Al Husseini, Palestinian-appointed governor of Jerusalem, sees things decidedly differently. While he observed the demolition, his Fatah colleague Nidal Abu Garbiyeh was arrested by the police and taken into custody. “It’s a very dangerous move,” Al Husseini says.

“This hotel is a symbol being ruined, and is sadly not the only one. Many more Palestinian homes will be razed, all this in the future Palestinian capital. If we thought there were some Israelis left who were interested in peace it’s clear we were wrong. All that’s left to do is urge the international community to step in, in order to salvage what is left of the peace process.”

Shepherd Hotel prior to demolition (Photo: Reuters)

Ravi Nasser, a Sheikh Jarrah resident, also has difficulty accepting the hotel’s demolition. “It’s a new settlement here in east Jerusalem,” he says. “I’m a Palestinian and we are in the capital of a future Palestinian state. All the neighbors I spoke to are down too because Israel continues to disregard our right to live here safely and peacefully.”

Nasser stressed that he and his Palestinian neighbors have no plans to ignore this new development. “We started organizing ourselves and will definitely protest what’s happening here. Anything is possible as far as we’re concerned. We oppose the occupation which is illegal according to International Law.”

Like Nasser, some Israeli Jews also protested the construction plan. “What we’re witnessing here is another step in the cruel process called the ‘Judaization of east Jerusalem’,” Assaf Sharon from the Sheikh Jarrah Solidarity movement says. “This act is aimed at sabotaging any chance for peace and co-existence in this city. Nothing here benefits Israel. It’s suicidal policy.”


Ynetnews > News > Breaking News,7340,L-4011214,00.html

EU denounces Israel’s demolition of Sheikh Jarrah hotel

Published:  01.09.11,

High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Catherine Ashton denounced Israel’s demolition of the Shepherd Hotel in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood of east Jerusalem, saying it was a “Palestinian symbol.” She said east Jerusalem was part of the occupied Palestinian territories and the EU does not recognize Israel’s annexation of this area.

The UK’s Foreign Office Minister Alistair Burt also condemned the demolition, saying, “This latest settlement activity does not help – on the contrary, it raises tensions unnecessarily.” (Ronen Medzini and AFP)


3,  West Bank: UN warns of new Israeli controls

By Jon Donnison

BBC News, West Bank

The United Nations says it is increasingly concerned that Israel is about to tighten access restrictions to the occupied West Bank.

It has been briefing aid agencies that Israel could soon increase restrictions and strengthen its checkpoints.

The Israeli army declined to comment but privately officials acknowledge that changes will take place in the coming months.

Israel controls all movement in and out of the Palestinian territory.

The West Bank has been under Israeli military occupation since 1967.

It is not know what form those changes will take. But UN officials say they fear they could involve making it more difficult for foreign workers to travel between Israel and the West Bank without getting pre-arranged permission.

They also believe the changes would make it harder for Palestinians living in Israel, especially Jerusalem, to gain access to the West Bank. They also say it would make it harder to get goods in and out.

UNRWA ‘More like Gaza’

The UN says it fears Israel could tighten its procedures so that entering and leaving the West Bank could become more like getting in and out of Gaza, where extremely tight restrictions apply.

“The collective punishment of 1.5 millions in Gaza has severely damaged Israel’s image around the world. I can not see how establishing a Gaza-style crossing regime would be in anyone’s interest,” said Chris Gunness, a spokesperson for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency which provides support for Palestinian refugees.

“I fervently urge Israel not to push ahead with its plan,” he added.

In recent months Israel has been carrying out building work to expand some of its West Bank checkpoints, making them appear more permanent.

Seeking recognition

All this happens as the Palestinian Authority under the leadership of Mahmoud Abbas, is increasingly talking about trying to independently seek a United Nations Security Council resolution to recognise a Palestinian state based on the pre-1967 borders.

In the 1967 Six Day War, Israel occupied the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem It also captured the Golan Heights from Syria.

It is believed Israel has been discussing changing its crossing procedures in and out of the West Bank for some time.

But some analysts believe the government could eventually introduce such measures as a response to any Palestinian move to achieve international recognition of a Palestinian state.

Israel has been very critical of such moves, saying a Palestinian state can only be achieved through negotiation with Israel.

In the past, Israel has argued that by strengthening security at the main checkpoints in and out of the West Bank, it has been able to relax some of the internal checkpoints, making it easier for Palestinians to move around.


4. The Observer,

9 January 2011

Palestinian mother tells of a family tragedy during protest against separation barrier.  Daughter becomes third casualty in a West Bank family dedicated to ‘non-violent resistance’ against Israeli barrier

Ana Carbajosa, Bil’in, West Bank

The family of Jawaher Abu Rahme, 35, say she died after inhaling massive quantities of tear gas fired by Israeli forces. Photograph: Observer Sitting on a bed in the family house, surrounded by posters that commemorate the death of her son, Subhaia Musa Abu Rahme laments her latest loss. Jawaher, her 35-year-old daughter, died on New Year’s Day after collapsing in her home village of Bil’in during a demonstration against the Israeli separation barrier. Despite assurances to the contrary from the Israeli army, her family insist that she died after inhaling massive quantities of tear gas.

“How do you think I feel?” says Abu Rahme softly, a white scarf covering her head and an almost absent look in her eyes. She can hardly comprehend what has happened to her family or the repeated horrors that have been inflicted on it. The family has come to symbolise the Palestinian struggle against the occupation of the West Bank.

Last year, Abu Rahme’s son, Bassam – a charismatic member of the committees that organise “non-violent resistance” against the barrier – died after being struck by a gas canister at a demonstration. Another son, Ashraf, has been left with a limp after being shot at close range with rubber-coated steel bullets by an Israeli soldier. And now, Jawaher.

“She was the nicest girl in Bil’in. Here, everyone liked her. The wall confiscated our lands, and now my children are gone. I have nothing left”, says Abu Rahme, a 55-year-old widow.

“But every time we lose someone we love, we gain strength to fight against the occupation,” she adds. “This is our land and we are going to defend it. We will not stop until we tear down the wall.”

Outside the house, on the patio, a group of men mourn Jawaher. They eat dates, drink spiced coffee and chain smoke – but barely speak. Next door, the women gather in a separate room, as tradition dictates. Political delegations, friends, relatives and schoolchildren pass by to express their condolences for the kind-hearted young woman who had worked as a carer for two disabled children in nearby Ramallah.

From the Abu Rahmes’ neighbourhood, the barrier that separates the Palestinian territories from Israel – and which cuts off the famil y from its olive groves – is clearly visible. For more than five years, they have participated with their neighbours in the struggle against the construction. But for them, more than for any other family in the village, the battle has brought tragedy. And last week, Jawaher’s death returned them to the headlines.

Her family are adamant she died after inhaling the tear gas fired by Israeli soldiers during the demonstration in Bil’in. The army questions the reliability of Palestinian reports, including the hospital documents, and has complained in a statement of “lack of co-operation with the Palestinians”. It also says that although the army inquiry has not yet been completed, “a number of scenarios have been posited, among them the possibility that Abu Rahme’s death was entirely unrelated to the demonstration last Friday.”

For a visibly exhausted Subhaia Musa Abu Rahme, there is no such doubt.

“I was with my daughter, a bit far away from where the clashes were taking place, when the soldiers started shooting gas,” she remembers. “The wind brought the gas. We were very affected. I was feeling bad when my daughter told me that she could not take it any more and started vomiting.” Another of Jawaher’s brothers, Samir Ibrahim, 34, recalls calling an ambulance to take his sister to the hospital in which she later died.

“She was in a very bad condition,” he says. “They took her to a house and she was vomiting foam from her mouth. In four or five minutes, an ambulance came. They [the doctors] told us that she lacked oxygen due to the gas.”

Every Friday, Samir attends the demonstration against the Israeli separation barrier, built in the aftermath of the second intifada.

Clashes at the protests are common, with some Palestinians throwing stones and the army shooting tear gas, a fetid liquid known as skunk and employing other crowd dispersal weapons. A dense cloud of smoke fills the air and spreads over the village within seconds. It is not unusual for people to vomit in the streets, their eyes burning from the tear gas. But still, Samir, his family and friends keep up their display of defiance.

“We go to show our suffering,” he says. “It is our way to denounce that they are raping our land.” When asked if the hardships his family has gone through make them special, he says no. “We are like the others. This is only a test from God.”

Bil’in, about two miles from the 1967 armistice border, or Green Line, has always been an agricultural village. But the villagers, according to Michael Sfard, the Israeli lawyer representing them, are now prevented from getting to about 50% of their farmlands by the barrier. The impoverished Abu Rahmes are among those who lost their land.

Like the rest they can, in principle, enter their groves through a gate that the army is obliged to open for a certain number of hours a day. However, according to Sfard, the army does not always comply.

Back in the family home, Ashraf, the brother who was shot two years ago, listens attentively to his mother and Samir, a red-and-white Palestinian scarf tied around his neck. His shooting was filmed by an Israeli human rights group and the images travelled around the world. He considers himself lucky; not only did he escape with relatively minor injuries, but the lieutenant-colonel who ordered the shooting is now being judged in a military court. But last week there was no reason to be cheerful. “Our family is destroyed,” he says. “There will always be sadness in our family.”


5,  Haaretz,

January 9, 2011

The IDF uses propaganda like an authoritarian regime

Instead of working toward revealing the truth behind the recent death of an anti-fence demonstrator the IDF is reaching into its bag of lies.

Instead of working toward revealing the truth behind the recent death of an anti-fence demonstrator the IDF is reaching into its bag of lies.

By Gideon Levy

Jawaher Abu Ramah died young. She stood facing the demonstrators against the separation fence in her village, inhaled very large quantities of the gas that Israel Defense Forces soldiers fired that day, collapsed and died several hours later at a Ramallah hospital.

These are definitive facts. The IDF should have immediately issued a statement expressing sorrow for the death of the demonstrator, and said it would investigate the excessive means used for dispersing demonstrations at Bil’in, which had killed Bassem, Jawaher’s brother, for no reason. He was hit by a gas canister fired directly at his chest two and a half years ago.

So, the IDF began with the spreading of lies, making up facts and spinning tales, originating with officers who did not dare identify themselves. Following the investigation into Jawaher’s death, it is also necessary to investigate how the army dares to distort in this way. Perhaps it will disturb Israeli society more than the death of a demonstrator.

It started with the first announcement of the IDF spokesman who spoke of an “illegal demonstration.” Illegal, Avi Benayahu? Stealing land for the construction of enormous settlements and the enrichment of questionable developers is legal; the defense establishment’s continuously ignoring the High Court decision that the fence route needs to be changed is legal; the killing of Bassem is legal; and only the demonstration is illegal. Why is it illegal? Are the Palestinians and the anti-occupation activists not entitled to demonstrate? What demonstrations can be more legitimate than peasants protesting against the theft of their lands – demonstrations that resulted in the High Court ruling? How could the Palestinians demonstrate legally? And why are the IDF and the police capable of dispersing the demonstrations of wild and violent settlers without deaths and only the dispersal of Palestinian demonstrations becomes – not for the first time – fatal?

But that was not enough. The day after Jawaher was killed, the IDF began disseminating lies. It’s not clear why the army chose to embark on this campaign since a day after Jawaher’s death IDF soldiers intentionally killed a youth carrying a bottle at the Bik’ot crossing, but that did not stir any outburst. The IDF left little that it did not disseminate about poor Jawaher. It was said that she died at home in peace, and not in hospital. Oops, it was proved that she died in hospital. When the IDF learned that this trick did not succeed, it came up with other stories, a bag full of lies. Jawaher was not at the demonstration. There are no photos of her. She was there, observing from about 100 meters, and was choked by the smoke.

Another lie from the bag of the IDF: Jawaher had cancer, not just any cancer, but leukemia. She stood at the demonstration and suddenly collapsed and died of leukemia. Where did they pull that from? Perhaps because her father died of leukemia five years ago. Blood? Through its propagandists in the media, the IDF said that the funeral was “strange,” that her face was “covered” and that her body was covered in a “blood-soaked” shroud (perhaps she cut her wrists? ). No one saw the shroud, nor the covered face – only God knows their importance, but whatever. It’s enough that the IDF says leukemia and bloody shroud for the army or right-wing analysts to raid the media and spread their tales.

Jawaher watched the demonstration, inhaled gas, collapsed, was taken, in serious condition, by ambulance, to the hospital and died there the next day. As far as anyone knows, she did not suffer from leukemia. She had complained of vertigo, and the doctor diagnosed an ear infection. There was no autopsy, and the inventions on her medical past only desecrated the honor of the dead and her family. Even if she was taking medicine, as the IDF disseminated, did she not die as a result of inhaling gas?

It’s good to know that the death of Jawaher is on the IDF’s conscience. That is how it should be. All 21 Palestinian anti-fence demonstrators who were killed over the years, and with them dozens activists who were injured, including an American student who lost her eye during the summer, should also be on its conscience. But the way to deal with a troubled conscience needs to be through the exposure of the truth, not through lies. For the attention of the new IDF spokesman: The IDF is not a propaganda ministry of an authoritarian regime.


6. Haaretz,

January 9, 2011

Israel Prize laureates join academic boycott of settlement university

155 academics sign petition calling Ariel, where the education center is located, an illegal settlement whose existence contravenes international law and the Geneva Convention.

By Or Kashti

Some 155 university and college faculty members have signed a petition calling for an academic boycott of the Ariel University Center.

In the petition, the lecturers state their “unwillingness to take part in any type of academic activity taking place in the college operating in the settlement of Ariel.” Furthermore, the petition states that “Ariel is not part of the sovereign state of Israel, and therefore it is impossible to require us to appear there.”

Among the signatories are three Israel Prize laureates – professors Yehoshua Kolodny of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Benjamin Isaac of Tel Aviv University and Itamar Procaccia of the Weizmann Institute of Science.

“We, academics from a variety of fields and from all the institutions of higher learning in Israel, herein express publicly our opposition to the continued occupation and the establishment of settlements,” the petition states. “Ariel was built on occupied land. Only a few kilometers away from flourishing Ariel, Palestinians live in villages and refugee camps under unbearably harsh conditions and without basic human rights. Not only do they not have access to higher education, some do not even have running water. These are two different realities that create a policy of apartheid,” the petition also says.

The signatories state that Ariel was an illegal settlement whose existence contravened international law and the Geneva Convention. “It was established for the sole purpose of preventing the Palestinians from creating an independent state and thus preventing us, citizens of Israel, from having the chance to ever live in peace in this region.”

The petition was initiated and organized by Nir Gov of the Weizmann Institute’s Department of Chemical Physics. Unlike other such initiatives, over a third of the list’s signatories are from the natural and exact sciences.

Gov, who started organizing the petition a few weeks ago, said it was important to show that not only people known from other petitions support a boycott of Ariel, and therefore this petition has among its signatories many scholars who are not from the social sciences and the humanities.

“Israeli academia must differentiate itself from the ‘settlement’ academia,” said Gov. “Only significant differentiation can help our supporters abroad who are working against an academic boycott of Israel. This assistance is important, but all in all it is secondary to the principled stand that the goal of the establishment of the college at Ariel was not teaching and academic research, but political. It may be too late, but we felt a need to state in the clearest language that Israeli academia must not be involved in the settlement project,” Gov also said.

Gov said he encountered some colleagues who agreed with the message of the petition but were afraid to sign. He said such fear, “in the current atmosphere, is understandable, tangible. Even if there is no official action against the signatories, we may pay some sort of price.”

About three weeks ago, the Council For Higher Education issued a public statement against calls by Israeli academics for an academic boycott of Israel. The council, which is headed by Education Minister Gideon Sa’ar, said such calls “undermine the foundations of the higher education system.”

However, Gov said there is no contradiction between the council’s statement and the petition. “The council says rightly that there is a danger of delegitimization of the academic system in Israel. We say the source of this danger is Ariel and the settlements.”

Yigal Cohen-Orgad, chairman of the Ariel college’s executive committee, said: “A tiny and bizarre minority of some 150 lecturers is behind the petition, out of 7,000 faculty members. The cooperation between the Ariel University Center and many hundreds of scholars from universities in Israel and many hundreds more from 40 universities abroad, is the response to this petition. We know the heads of the universities oppose the call for a boycott and all it entails. I am sure that academia will continue to cooperate with us.”


7 Haaretz,

January 9, 2011

Israeli intellectuals decry Knesset plan to investigate Leftist groups

In letter sent to all Knesset members, signatories say investigation of citizens by elected officials signals the end of democracy.

By Jonathan Lis

A group of Israeli intellectuals has sent a letter to all Knesset members decrying the intent to establish a parliamentary committee of inquiry into Israeli human rights groups.

The group includes a number of Israel Prize laureates, among them professors Yehuda Bauer, Chaim Adler, Yermiyahu Yovel and Micha Ullman, Shulamit Aloni, David Tartakover, Danny Karavan and Ram Loevy. Signatories also include Prof. Haim Ben-Shahar, Prof. Yaron Ezrahi, the painter Yair Garboz, Prof. David Harel and authors Ronit Matalon, Sami Michael, Yehoshua Sobol, Sefi Rachlevsky and Yoram Kaniuk.

“Last week, the Knesset raised its hand against democracy in Israel,” the letter states, adding that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had encouraged the initiative by imposing faction discipline on the vote.

“He, and each of the 41 MKs who voted for the establishment of a political committee to hunt the human rights organizations, will be remembered as being the ones who attempted to smash what is left of democracy in Israel and impose a fascist regime. What is worse, only 17 MKs bothered to try to stop the destruction. Each and every MK who did not find time to oppose the initiative to end democracy in Israel bears personal responsibility for the disaster. A black flag now flies above the legislature in Israel.”

The letter also states that in a democracy citizens are sovereign, and the task of elected officials is to supervise the work of the government. “When elected officials, even led by the prime minister, seek to investigate citizens, democracy ends,” the document said.

The letter ends by saying that if the committee is established, “the government in Israel will lose the last of its legitimacy. All its activities, its laws and its demands of its citizens will be patently illegal. Thus, the obligation of citizens in a democracy to respect its laws will be fundamentally undermined.”


8.  Israel’s witch-hunt against leftist organizations

Numerous public figures and organizations — from leftists and liberals in Israel and the US, to centrist journalists and mainstream Jewish Diaspora organizations — have sharply condemned the Israeli Knesset’s January 5th decision, passed by a lopsided 47-16 margin of lawmakers, to investigate the funding sources of Israeli leftist organizations. Many of the following commentaries (links below) discuss the bill’s alarming ramifications for Israeli democracy, even if the planned parliamentary committee never actually conducts the threatened “investigation.” Some see this as a disgraceful Israeli equivalent to the infamous anti-communist investigations of the US House Un-American Activities Committee in the 1950s and its proceedings against political activists in the 1960s.

Among the views of these commentators: veteran Israeli political activist Uri Avnery points out that many senior figures in the Netanyahu government, including the Prime Minister himself, cravenly absented themselves from the vote. Blogger Mitchell Plitnick, formerly of JPN, argues that the vote is one more sign that extreme-rightist politician Avigdor Lieberman is quickly becoming the gravitational center of Israeli political discourse. Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem, one of the targets of the bill, points out that the organization’s funding sources are already transparent, so the bill’s actual aims have nothing to do with its stated intentions.

A number of the commentaries denouncing the bill have pointed out that pro-settlement organizations are funded much more lavishly than Israeli human rights groups by American donors — in apparent contravention of US tax laws regarding charitable donations to organizations that contravene US political policies. And Israel i blogger-journalist Rechavia Berman issues perhaps the sharpest jeremiad against the deterioration of Israeli democracy and human rights discourse that the bill signals, declaring that he cannot be faithful to a state that so brazenly trammels civil and human rights.

Israeli journalist and activist Roi Maor, in an analysis of the bill, offers one unexpected note of optimism: if the Israeli government is so bent on bullying leftist organizations, jailing non-violent activists (such as Jonathan Pollack), and obfuscating its clear responsibility in the killing of innocents (such as Bil’in activist Jawaher Abu Rahma), then it must feel itself deeply threatened — a sign that rights-activism is having its effect and must be increased.

Ofer Neiman, who recently came aboard JPN as an editor, articulates another perspective: “Many Israeli human rights activists agree that if and when the State of Israel decides to turn on its ‘blue-eyed’ dissidents, western public opinion will become more open to calls (emanating from Palestinian civil society as well as from Israeli and international groups) to step-up the boycott, divestment and sanctions efforts against the Israeli economy and Israeli institutions.”

Boycott, divestment and sanctions efforts are undeniably appearing with vigor in unexpected places, such as the halls of Israeli academe, as Haaretz recently reported <, where 155 university and college faculty members have signed a petition calling for an academic boycott of Ariel University, a newly established institution in the Israeli settlement of Ariel.

Commentators such as Plitnick have suggested, in turn, that European sanctions against Israeli settlement activity could be a convenient vehicle for the US administration to exert pressure on Israel indirectly without running afoul of American domestic political realities <>. The Obama administration, as Plitnick and others point out, can send a strong signal simply by not blocking international efforts to nudge the Israelis into a peace agreement — by, for example, not vetoing a soon-to-be-proposed UN Security Council resolution declaring Israeli settlements illegal. As in other cases where states drag out an occupation due to entrenched interests — Indonesia’s former occupation of East Timor comes to mind — international pressure can be at once legitimate and useful.

–Lincoln Z. Shlensky

Links to commentaries on the Knesset’s recent vote to investigate leftist organizations that have been critical of the government and military:

B’Tselem: The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights: “The Knesset’s decision is what harms Israel’s international status”

Mitchell Plitnick: “Is Lieberman the New Israeli Mainstream?”

Roi Maor: “Knesset Committee on un-Israeli activities”

Rechavia Berman: “To such an Israel I shall be a traitor”

The American Jewish Committee: “AJC Urges Knesset to Reconsider Measure”

Uri Avnery: “Hi, Joe [McCarthy]!”


Jewish Peace News editors:

Joel Beinin

Racheli Gai

Rela Mazali

Sarah Anne Minkin

Ofer Neiman

Lincoln Z. Shlensky

Rebecca Vilkomerson

Alistair Welchman


Jewish Peace News archive and blog:


Jewish Peace News sends its news clippings only to subscribers. To subscribe, unsubscribe, or manage your subscription, go to http:



9.  Haaretz,

January 9, 2011

Israel’s very own Revolutionary Guards

The Knesset does not want to look like the parliaments in the Arab countries, but it does not want to give up the authority to act like them.

By Zvi Bar’el

Let’s assume that a parliamentary committee of inquiry is established to rummage through the papers of human rights groups – which, anyway, the registrar of nonprofit organizations is allowed to do at any time – and let’s assume the committee finds out that some of them have long been receiving sizable donations from Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran and Shining Path. So what? Exactly what offense should they be tried for?

Nonprofits in Israel are not limited in terms of their source of funding. They must maintain their books and report every contribution from a “foreign political entity” that exceeds $20,000 and declare its purpose.

Legally, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad can contribute a million dollars to Let the Animals Live to build closed shelters for street cats. The association would be prosecuted for contact with an enemy country, but not for the actual receipt of the funding. It could also be prosecuted if makes use of the funds for purposes not included in its charter; for example, if the Iranian contribution went to buy land on the West Bank for settlers. That is the paradox of Israeli law.

But it is not obedience to the law that interests the democra-tyranical Revolutionary Guards in the Knesset. Were these legislative bullies truly worried about a “hostile takeover” of Israeli public discourse by foreign states and groups, or were really concerned about those who want to smear Israel’s bad name on the walls of the world, they could adopt the Egyptian nonprofit associations law, which states that no funding is to be received from foreign entities, whether Egyptian or not, without authorization of the minister in charge. Egypt doesn’t beat around the bush. Every foreigner is a suspect, particularly if he wants to encourage the fight for civil rights; and, as in Israel, every human rights group is a hostile entity whose entire purpose is to prove that the state has failed. In Jordan the law is even tougher: It requires associations to obtain the approval of “the government,” and not only from the minister in charge, to receive foreign funding.

But Israel is not Jordan or Egypt, and it certainly is not Lebanon, where there is no prohibition whatsoever on receiving foreign funding. It is worse. The Knesset does not want to look like the parliaments in the Arab countries, but it does not want to give up the authority to act like them. It wants to act as if there is a law against receiving contributions from foreigners without actually having to legislate it and make a mockery of itself. All it wants to do is “investigate,” that is, to brand as suspect all those associations without having to air the issue in a court of law. To pull their pants down in public, to search them and then release them until the next search. Meanwhile, the honorable committee can also send letters to donors and warn that this or that organization to which they have contributed for years is under investigation. It is a suspect. And who wants to donate to an organization under investigation?

The organizations in question are “the usual suspects”: Center for the Defense of the Individual; Yesh Din; Ir Amim; Bimkom; the Public Committee Against Torture; Adalah; Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions; Physicians for Human Rights-Israel; Gisha: Legal Center for Freedom of Movement; Mossawa Center; Machsom Watch and the Alternative Information Center. All, as we know, are harmful to Israel’s good name.

Here,too, Egyptian law can help. Damaging Egypt’s image in the world is a criminal offense, for which the sociologist and human rights activist Prof. Saad Eddin Ibrahim has been convicted. Similar laws protect the image of other countries in the region, and as the parliament of a country that is becoming more integrated into the Middle East, the Knesset would do well to adopt this law as well, and apply it to every citizen. After all, private citizens, and not only nonprofit groups, can destroy the pure image of Israel.

We can try another simple solution. The Knesset could pass a law that would fully fund the work of nonprofits and prohibit them from receiving money from any foreign entity. That way the Knesset could oversee how money is spent and decide the goals of these groups. The government would fund the humanitarian aid group Latet and Doctors Without Borders and write checks to Adalah. They would all be suckled by the government, and the government alone could dictate the content and makeup of Israeli civil society. Unrealistic? Undemocratic? But, after all, that is this Knesset’s specialty.


10.  [forwarded by Miriam]

about 8 minutes, well done, on the conflation of anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism.  Please distribute widely.

Posted in Nova NewsletterComments Off on DOROTHY ONLINE NEWSLETTER



January 9, 2011


Israeli intelligence is the world leader in terrorism.


by Jonathan Azaziah


Minutes into the new year, an explosion rocked al-Qiddissin Coptic Church in Alexandria, Egypt. 25 innocent people dead (1).  At least 97 innocents wounded (2). A 17-year old eyewitness ominously stated, ‘The last thing I heard was a powerful explosion and then my ears went deaf. All I could see were body parts scattered all over (3).’

All initial reports stated that a car bomb was the weapon used to carry out the New Years Day bloodshed (4). The US-backed Zionist dictatorship that runs Egypt typically went against the facts on the ground however, with the Ministry of Interior blaming the assault on a suicide bomber, and without a drop of concrete evidence, stating that the attack was carried out by none other than Al-Qaeda (5), which doesn’t exist (6), and whose leader, CIA agent Timothy Osman a.k.a. Osama Bin Laden, is long dead (7).

From AP, to Yahoo, to the New York Times, the liars that run the Zionist media immediately went into overdrive, vociferously promoting virulent garbage about ‘sectarian tensions’ between Muslims and Christians in Egypt being inflamed after the bombing (8). Of course there is no evidence of such ‘sectarian tension,’ but the mouthpieces of Israel, from the television to print, have no interest in telling the truth and they never have.

Not promoted by the Zionist media is the longstanding unity between Egypt’s Muslims and Coptic Minority (9), nor has it been promoted that Islamic and Christian leaders have stood side by side in the aftermath of the bombing, which wounded innocents from both faiths (10). The enmity between the two religious groups is nothing more than carefully concocted Zionist fiction.

There is only one entity in the entire region that benefits from religious division in any Middle Eastern nation: Israel. One of the key strategic goals of the Zionist entity in Egypt is to trigger a communal war between Muslims and Christians (11). The Lebanese Resistance movement, Hezbollah, condemned the bombing,  declaring it ‘serves the Zionist scheme… aimed at fragmenting our Arab and Islamic countries (12).’ All evidence, physical and circumstantial, points directly to Mossad being the culprit behind the al-Qiddissin church bombing (13).

In recent years, Zionist intelligence activity in Egypt has increased greatly. Tel Aviv was the hand behind the cut of Egypt’s maintain internet cable in January of 2008, severing Egypt from the international online network. Mossad was conducting surveillance on the phone calls of the highest tier of the Egyptian government. The Israeli agency employed a spy to infiltrate Islamic opposition groups in Egypt. All of this was discovered just days before the Alexandria church massacre, when a Mossad spy ring was busted, unveiling a plot of subversion that would target Egyptian telecom companies. This ring was connected to other Israeli espionage groups in Lebanon and Syria (14).

Egypt’s former Foreign Minister, Abdallah al-Ashal, and the Egyptian Bar Association have gone on record to state that the massacre at al-Qiddissin Church was the work of Mossad, reacting murderously to its spy network being unfurled (15).

In November, a warning was issued to the world that Coptic churches in Egypt would be attacked. The warning was issued by ‘Al-Qaeda-linked’ Islamic State of Iraq, who according to the Zionist media, carried out the horrific assault on Sayedat al-Najat Cathedral in the Karada district of Baghdad at the end of October (16).

This atrocious theory has been thoroughly debunked however. What took place at Sayedat al-Najat was a Mossad false flag operation, aimed at provoking tension between occupied Iraq’s Muslim and Christian communities, conducted with all of the usual tools: fake passports produced in Tel Aviv, Israeli-produced IEDs and the quintessential car bomb (17). The appalling murder of at least 58 Iraqi Christians was also used to cover up the condemnation of the Zionist entity’s occupation of Palestine by several prominent Christian leaders (18). The warning wasn’t issued by non-existent Islamic State of Iraq therefore, but Mossad.

The car bomb is the signature of the Israeli agency. It is the weapon that has been used to conduct sabotage, assassinations and false flag terrorism across occupied Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Lebanon and India (19). The Muslim Brotherhood, which was blatantly robbed by Zionist dictator Hosni Mubarak’s regime in the recent Egyptian elections (20), called for Egyptian churches to be protected after the fake Al-Qaeda group made its incendiary comments (21). But this call was not heeded. Only an hour prior to Mossad’s car bombing, Egyptian security forces inexplicably withdrew from their positions, leaving four policemen to guard the massive church with nearly 2,000 people attending midnight mass. The car bomb was detonated at the post that was left by Egyptian security forces (22). 

This collusion between Israeli intelligence and Egyptian security forces is by no means surprising, considering the existing Israeli-Egyptian collaboration in illegally and brutally besieging the people of the Gaza Strip (23). The violent assault against the Coptic community on New Years Day was also executed to deflect the attention off of the stolen Egyptian elections (24); it is widely known that Egypt is a premier recipient of Zionist-occupied United States government aid money, receiving almost $30 billion in three decades (25). The usurping entity of Zion and its American counterpart couldn’t have their staunchest ally in the Middle East embarrassed by stolen elections. Answer? False flag attack.

The tactic being used to split the Muslim and Christian communities of Egypt is the oldest trick in the Zionist entity’s book: divide and conquer. It is widely known by the people of the Arab and Muslim world, especially Iraqis, that the only terrorism that exists in the Middle East (especially occupied Iraq), is the terrorism that is carried out by Israeli, American and British intelligence operatives (26). Divide and conquer has been used prominently in the Zionist-ravaged nation of Iraq, including a wall being built by an Israeli company to separate Sunni and Shia communities (27), and the nation of Lebanon, that was devastated by a savage civil war in the 1970s and 1980s contrived and manipulated by the Zionist entity (28) and the United States, with Zionist war criminal Henry Kissinger leading the way (29).

Muslims and Christians must stand together and reject these abhorrent divisions. People of conscience from all ethnicities, backgrounds and faiths must stand in solidarity with them. The victims of Mossad’s massacre at al-Qiddissin Church in Alexandria will not be forgotten. The fallen will be honored with sincere Resistance to all oppressive powers; be it the puppet Mubarak or the usurping regime of Israel itself. Unified Resistance is what petrifies the occupiers more than anything else on earth. Make them tremble; unity is an armor that cannot be pierced by their bullets or rattled by their bombs.



(1) Egypt Calls For Calm As Church Bombing Toll Rises To 25 by Amro Hassan and Borzou Daragahi, The Los Angeles Times

(2) Number Of Injured In Church Blast In Egypt Rises To 97 by RIA Novosti

(3) Egypt Bomb Kills 21 At Alexandria Coptic Church by BBC News

(4) Seven Killed In Car Bomb Near Alexandria Church, Egyptian Dictatorship Blames Mythical Al Qaeda by The Associated Press; Alexandria Church Bombing Eye-Witness Describes Terror Suspect by Ahmed Sabri, Asharq Alawsat; Alexandria Church Bombing by Al-Jazeera English; Church Bombing In Egypt: A Car Bomb Exploded Outside Coptic Orthodox Church And Killed Nine In Egypt by TPR One

(5) Egypt: Hundreds Protest To Denounce Terrorist Attack On Coptic Christians by Amro Hassan, The Los Angeles Times; Al-Qaeda Behind Alexandria Church Bombing: Egypt by Miraya FM

(6) The Power Of Nightmares: Rise Of The Politics Of Fear (documentary) by Adam Curtis, BBC News

(7) Years Of Deceit: US Openly Accepts Bin Laden Long Dead by Gordon Duff, Veterans Today; Osama Bin Laden A.K.A. CIA Asset ‘Tim Osman’ by What Really Happened?

(8) Christians, Police Clash After Egypt Church Bomb by Maggie Michael and Lee Keath, The Associated Press; Egypt Church Bombing Fuels Sectarian Rift by Cam McGrath, Yahoo! News; Egypt Orders Tighter Security After Church Bombing by Liam Stack and David D. Kirkpatrick, The New York Times

(9) Egyptian Religious Leaders Affirm Unity by Al-Masry Al-Youm

(10) Egypt: Muslims And Christians Show Unity After Bombing by Kelly Heffernan-Tabor, CBS News

(11) Palestinians Condemn Alexandria Church Bombing by Khalid Amayreh, The Palestinian Information Center

(12) Hezbollah: Egypt Attack Serves US, Israel by Press TV

(13) Mossad Behind Egypt Church Blast by Press TV, The Tehran Times

(14) ‘Israeli Spying Network’ Uncovered In Egypt Days Before Church Blast by Dr. Ashraf Ezzat, Veterans Today

(15) Egyptian Lawyers Blame Israel For Church Bombing by The Jerusalem Post

(16) Car Bomb At Church In Egypt Kills 21 As Christian Worshipers Gather To Celebrate New Year by The Daily Mail

(17) The Baghdad Cathedral Massacre: Zionist Fingerprints All Over by Jonathan Azaziah, Mask of Zion

(18) Al-Qaeda’s Christian Massacre – Aiding And Abetting The Occupation Of Palestine by Maidhc O Cathail

(19) 26/11: Mossad Terrorizes Mumbai by Jonathan Azaziah, Mask of Zion

(20) Egypt Election Routs Popular Muslim Brotherhood From Parliament by Kristen Chick, The Christian Science Monitor

(21) Al-Qaeda Threatens Christians, Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood: Protect Churches by Al-Manar

(22) Egyptian Security Guards Withdrew One Hour Before Church Blast, Say Eyewitnesses by Assyrian International News Agency

(23) Egypt’s Blockade On Gaza by Ahmed Shokr, Dissident Voice

(24) All Is Fair In Egyptian Elections by Ahmed Amr, Dissident Voice

(25) Egypt Stories: U.S. Aid To Egypt Totals $28 Billion In Three Decades by USAID

(26) British Terrorism In Iraq by Dr. Elias Akleh, Global Research

(27) The Zionist Murderers Of Iraq by Jonathan Azaziah, Mask of Zion

(28) The Sabra And Shatila Massacre (16-18 September 1982) by The Electronic Intifada

(29) Sayyed Nasrallah Full Speech On Martyr’s Day November 11 2010 by Moqawama English

Posted in World3 Comments




Ana Carbajosa

The Observer

2,January 2011


Gazan youth issue manifesto to vent their anger with all sides in the conflict

An anonymous group of students has created a document to express their frustration born of Hamas’s violent crackdowns on ‘western decadence’, the destruction wreaked by Israel’s attacks and the political games played by Fatah and the UN


Hamas security forces ride a vehicle in Gaza

Members of Hamas’s security forces on escort duty. A group of young Gazans say they are fed up with Hamas and ‘sick of bearded guys with guns’. Photograph: Mohammed Salem/Reuters

The meeting takes place in a bare room in a block of flats in the centre ofGaza City. No photographs, no real names – those are the conditions.

This is the first time that a group of young Palestinian cyber-activists has agreed to meet a journalist since launching what it calls Gaza Youth’s Manifesto for Change. It is an incendiary document – written with courage and furious energy – that has captivated thousands of people who have come across it online, and the young university students are visibly excited, but also scared. “Not only are our lives in danger; we are also putting our families at risk,” says one of them, who calls himself Abu George.

Gaza Youth’s Manifesto for Change is an extraordinary, impassioned cyber-scream in which young men and women from Gaza – where more than half the 1.5 million population is under 18 – make it clear that they’ve had enough. “Fuck Hamas…” begins the text. “Fuck Israel. FuckFatah. Fuck UN. Fuck UNWRA. Fuck USA! We, the youth in Gaza, are so fed up with Israel, Hamas, the occupation, the violations of human rights and the indifference of the international community!”

It goes on to detail the daily humiliations and frustrations that constitute everyday life in the Gaza Strip, the Palestinian slice of land that Israel and Egypt have virtually sealed off from the world since Hamas was elected to power in 2006.

“Here in Gaza we are scared of being incarcerated, interrogated, hit, tortured, bombed, killed,” reads the extraordinary document. “We are afraid of living, because every single step we take has to be considered and well-thought, there are limitations everywhere, we cannot move as we want, say what we want, do what we want, sometimes we even can’t think what we want because the occupation has occupied our brains and hearts so terrible that it hurts and it makes us want to shed endless tears of frustration and rage!”

The text ends with a triple demand: “We want three things. We want to be free. We want to be able to live a normal life. We want peace. Is that too much to ask?”

On Facebook, the group calls itself Gaza Youth Breaks Out. When the cyber-activists wrote the manifesto three weeks ago, they gave themselves a year to gather enough support before thinking about further steps. But their text has travelled around the world at an unexpected speed and has harvested thousands of supporters, many of them human rights activists, who say they are ready to help.

Now, the authors are dealing with the impact of a document that could be a turning point in the life of the Strip. “We did not expect this to be so big,” one of them admits. Eight people – three women and five men – wrote the text. They are normal students, from the more secular elements of Gazan society. All declare themselves to be non-political and disgusted with the tensions and rivalries that divide Palestinians between Hamas, the rulers of Gaza, and Fatah, the more secular party which governs the Palestinian Authority, based in the West Bank. “Politics is bollocks, it is screwing our lives up,” said one member of the group. “Politicians only care about money and about their supporters. The Israelis are the only ones benefiting from the division.”

Two of the group have been detained by the Gazan authorities several times, accused among other crimes of “immoral” behaviour. They say that they have been abused in jail and claim that physical and psychological punishment is commonplace in Gaza’s detention centres.

Another one obtained a scholarship to attend a workshop at an American university, but he says Israel did not issue a permit that would allow him to leave the Strip.

“We are supposed to be the engine of change in this society, but our voices are muted. In the press, at university, there is no room in our society to talk freely, out of the frame, without putting yourself and your family at risk,” says one, who wants to be called Abu Yazan. He adds: “In Gaza, you feel watched at school, in the streets, everywhere. You can be thrown into jail at any time. [Hamas] will threaten you with ruining your family reputation and that would be it.”

These youngsters do not represent anybody except themselves, but their call for change has resonated strongly, not only abroad but also inside Gaza. Their Facebook page already has thousands of friends – including, they say, many from the Strip.

The causes of frustration are legion. The Israeli blockade forbids Gazans to travel in and out of the Strip without a permit, which is difficult to obtain. For Gazan students who wish to study abroad, the most difficult part is not being accepted at a foreign university or getting a scholarship, but simply being able to travel.

Inside the Strip, things do not get much better. Israeli shelling which follows the launching of rockets into Israel by Palestinian militants is part of their everyday life. Power cuts and ruinous sanitary conditions are among the side-effects of the embargo suffered by Gaza’s inhabitants.

With high unemployment in the Strip and little access to other job markets after graduation, many feel that they have reached a dead end. Some keep studying and accumulating degrees and foreign languages, which they learn via the internet, hoping for better days to come. Others kill their time smoking hookahs with their friends day after day. There is an increasing number who rely on drugs to cope with their conflict traumas and frustrations.

Going out, meeting friends in cafés – let alone clubs or discotheques – or attending cultural events has become an increasingly complicated task as Hamas cracks down on western “decadence”.

In Gaza there are no theatres and few concerts aside from the Islamic musical performances organised by the Hamas authorities. In the places where young men and women are allowed to meet, considered an “oasis” by the less conservative youth, the police are quick to interrogate mixed couples suspected of not being married or engaged.

The “last straw” for the writers of the Gaza manifesto came a month ago, when Hamas closed Sharek, an internationally financed organisation offering training and summer activities for thousands of adolescents and young people. Sharek had also became a hang-out place for the more liberal-minded in Gaza. Human Rights Watch recently issued a statement condemning its closure. “Hamas authorities in Gaza should allow an organisation that helps children and youth to reopen, and penalise officials who have harassed its workers,” it said.

According to Ihab Al Ghusain, a spokesman for the Hamas Ministry of the Interior, the problems highlighted by Gaza’s disaffected youth are sometimes the result of over-zealous officials. “There are no laws prohibiting men and women sitting together in public places in Gaza,” he said. “But some policemen at their own initiative interrogate the couples. Those policemen should be punished.”

He says that proof of the government’s commitment to Gaza’s young generation is that it has declared 2011 the Year for the Youth. But the authors of the youth manifesto are unlikely to be persuaded by such symbolic initiatives. The group is currently investing most of its time and energy in debating new strategies to pursue a web-based platform for change. The new year may yet become one for the youth of the Strip, but perhaps not in the way Hamas intended.

• The caption on the photograph in this article was amended on 5 January 2011 to make it clear that it shows members of Hamas’s security forces.

The Manifesto

“Fuck Hamas. Fuck Israel. Fuck Fatah. Fuck UN. Fuck UNWRA. Fuck USA! We, the youth in Gaza, are so fed up with Israel, Hamas, the occupation, the violations of human rights and the indifference of the international community!

“We want to scream and break this wall of silence, injustice and indifference like the Israeli F16s breaking the wall of sound; scream with all the power in our souls in order to release this immense frustration that consumes us because of this fucking situation we live in…

“We are sick of being caught in this political struggle; sick of coal-dark nights with airplanes circling above our homes; sick of innocent farmers getting shot in the buffer zone because they are taking care of their lands; sick of bearded guys walking around with their guns abusing their power, beating up or incarcerating young people demonstrating for what they believe in; sick of the wall of shame that separates us from the rest of our country and keeps us imprisoned in a stamp-sized piece of land; sick of being portrayed as terrorists, home-made fanatics with explosives in our pockets and evil in our eyes; sick of the indifference we meet from the international community, the so-called experts in expressing concerns and drafting resolutions but cowards in enforcing anything they agree on; we are sick and tired of living a shitty life, being kept in jail by Israel, beaten up by Hamas and completely ignored by the rest of the world.

“There is a revolution growing inside of us, an immense dissatisfaction and frustration that will destroy us unless we find a way of canalising this energy into something that can challenge the status quo and give us some kind of hope.

“We barely survived the Operation Cast Lead, where Israel very effectively bombed the shit out of us, destroying thousands of homes and even more lives and dreams. During the war we got the unmistakable feeling that Israel wanted to erase us from the face of the Earth. During the last years, Hamas has been doing all they can to control our thoughts, behaviour and aspirations. Here in Gaza we are scared of being incarcerated, interrogated, hit, tortured, bombed, killed. We cannot move as we want, say what we want, do what we want.

“ENOUGH! Enough pain, enough tears, enough suffering, enough control, limitations, unjust justifications, terror, torture, excuses, bombings, sleepless nights, dead civilians, black memories, bleak future, heart-aching present, disturbed politics, fanatic politicians, religious bullshit, enough incarceration! WE SAY STOP! This is not the future we want! We want to be free. We want to be able to live a normal life. We want peace. Is that too much to ask?”




Dear Editor


I was mildly surprised when reading your article about the alleged misuse of the word ‘Shoah’, and its impact on the survivors of the Holocaust. It was not that long ago when an the Israeli minister, in fact the deputy defence minister Matan Vilnai, in 2008 said ‘they (the Palestinians) will bring upon themselves a bigger Shoah because we will use all our might‘.


At the time whilst many decent peace loving people around the world, including Holocaust survivors, were in deep shock and horrified at the use of the word, we were reassured that Shoah did not always mean Holocaust and in fact in this cpntext meant tragedy or catastrophe. This was reiterated again and again by Israeli officials and concurrently by Israeli and Zionist commenters in opinion pieces and blogosphere.  


 Now we are being told by The JC that Shoah does indeed mean Holocaust and is offensive. If so, either the Deputy Defence Minister of Israel called for the genocide of the Palestinans,  or he didn’t. If he did shouldn’t you energies be directed at the offence to Holocaust survivors he has caused and potentially criminal statement he made, if it doesn’t can you stop trying to silence voices that are critical of Israel and her policies.

Furthermore there is no evidence that the word Shoah was used to deliberately cause offence as you state in your article, but from looking at the site it is used  to draw a parallel, if that is offensive to people then I would suggest, they put pressure on the IDF to change its conduct, and the Israeli government to change its policies that lead to such comparisons being made, as there is an increasing chorus of voices in the world that agree with the parallel and inference being made.


Jarrar Mughal







January 04, 2011

Posted in EducationComments Off on ZIONIST: TEACH YOUR CHILDREN WELL



January 8, 2011

What could the all powerful OZ (Amerika) learn from a bunch of Egyptian Muslims ?

As I was going over a couple of articles I recently posted on my website, ( the similarities of the dynamics in the stories struck me as I read them over again and considered them anew. 

The 1st post referred to a story about a rowdy soccer fan who was ‘subdued’ by security forces on the field who then, in turn, became abusive and brutal after pinning him to the ground, they beat him repeatedly with clubs until finally irate soccer fans and team mates had had enough. Out of the stands and from the sidelines they poured on to the field punching and kicking the security people who were sent fleeing for their lives, and rescuing the over exuberant young man. 

The 2nd post which I found personally even more remarkable, concerned thousands of Egyptian Muslims who along with Egyptians of all backgrounds found the attack on the Coptic Church (which many believe to be the work of ‘outside intelligence agents’ instigating local cutouts) to be so horrendous that they came together and on their Christmas Ceremony in Coptic Churches around Egypt thousands of Muslims surrounded the worshippers and joined them inside and outside their churches effectively guaranteeing the safety of their Christian brothers and sisters with their own lives ! 

Now, while at first blush, these might appear to be vastly different kinds of stories, I submit that there is a common thread that runs through both and it is quite simply that in both stories from half way around the world with different backgrounds and different cultures common men and women saw evil raise it’s ugly head and they could not look away. They knew they must act and resist it. That did not surprise me. I have, in my 64 years seen brave men resist evil sometimes successfully and sometime not so much. 

The part that I found so remarkable in both stories is that No One said .. “Look we need to get a plan here, or hey those cops have real guns, or yeah well suppose those terrorists decide to blow up the church I’m at !! Why should I die for them Christians ? I’m not even one of them !! 

In both stories, in both cases, average men and women saw evil and said NO !!
NO .. We will not let you brutalize this person ! 
NO ..We will not let you murder and terrorize my family and my countrymen. 
NO .. We will place our bodies between you and the innocent to stop you
NO.. We will surround your victims and you will have to go through us to get to them !

I have rarely in my 64 years seen such an elegant, dramatic, or powerful example of the kind of ‘agape’ love that Jesus preached about so much “That a man would lay down his life for his friend.” then the story of those thousands of Muslims standing up and offering their lives to protect their Christian countrymen. 

I couldn’t help but wondering how many Christians would do the same if the shoe were on the other foot. How many Christians would cross the street (much less endanger their lives !) to help Muslims who were in trouble ! Damn few I fear. And if there are any Christians who really care about innocent Muslim families and children who are victims of genocide or torture they might want to address some of their resources to the Gaza Strip and those Palestinians who have had to soak up Israeli torture and murder there for the last 60 years.

Perhaps in both of these cases we as Americans need to take a good hard look in the mirror .. and see the truth as it is .. It’s time to forget the .. “Yeah buts..” and the “But what ifs” … and the “But suppose theys”  …. The time for all that crap is over. It’s time to call evil just what it is … EVIL … And we must say NO !  

NO DAMMIT !  I will not support evil, I will not lay down and roll over for it anymore.
I may not defeat evil .. but I will no longer submit to it’s lies .. (and then watch the bullies run !)

As far as I’m concerned ..
God Bless those soccer fans  
God Bless those brave Egyptian Muslims  
God Bless all the nameless men and women who stare down evil everyday
Maybe we can learn something from them. 
Maybe we can learn what they already know. 
That the first step is standing up and saying NO Dammit !! Enough !! No More of This !!

Posted in EducationComments Off on MAYBE WE CAN LEARN SOMETHING..




“If all went well, Iran could have a nuclear weapon in about ten years that could be delivered by a truck or large airplane but not an Iranian missile.”

By Clinton Bastin

The United States makes  false claims of nuclear weapon threats in other nations because US government officials and others do not understand nuclear materials’ and weapons’ production technology and are unwilling to rely on information from those who do.  They also do not appreciate the importance of nuclear power to reduce use of fossil fuels.   Virtually all information about nuclear weapons from US officials, news media and others is  wrong.
False claims of nuclear weapon threats  from important,  fully safeguarded nuclear power programs such as those in Iran

• undermine international safeguards  the only assurance nations have that their neighbors are not making nuclear weapons,
• lead to dangerous conflicts between nations,
• preclude effective negotiations to resolve conflicts and disagreements
• deter and delay nuclear power needed for transition from overuse of oil.

All US nuclear programs for production of nuclear weapons were managed by chemical companies and directed by US government chemical engineers.   These engineers would meet each year to prepare top secret nuclear weapon production schedules that would be signed by The President to authorize production of all the weapons that could be made – needed or not.  They would also meet with managers, scientists and engineers of weapons’ laboratories to learn about advanced weapon designs.  Some of these engineers made assessments for national security agencies of weapon threats from nuclear programs in other nations and directed US nonproliferation initiatives.  They also provided for use by IAEA inspectors lists of equipment and processes that might – or might not – indicate weapon-related activities, which has greatly compounded the problem.

All chemical companies who managed and all chemical engineers who directed nuclear weapon programs have left the DOE.  Despite highest priority and available information that should have been used for success,  the DOE in 1992 failed its mission to build a new reactor to produce nuclear materials for defense, space exploration and other important national programs.  It subsequently lost ability to produce these materials.

The DOE also lost ability to accurately assess nuclear weapon threats.  Scientists in non government institutes and others who do not understand basic concepts of nor the technology to produce nuclear weapons provide information to the news media about nuclear weapons.

David Albright, a physicist, former colleague, president of the non government Institute for Science and International Security in Washington and a former consultant for IAEA inspectors, is recognized by the US news media as an expert on nuclear weapons but is not.  I called David several months ago to correct inaccurate information attributed to him by New York Times reporter William J. Broad.   I also mentioned that Pakistan probably did not have many nuclear weapons because gun-type weapons require about 100 pounds of highly enriched uranium.  David said that he had seen drawings of Pakistan’s weapons and they had solid cores but were implosion, not gun-type.  With that statement, I  realized that David did not understand basic concepts of nuclear weapons.

Iran’s plans and commitment for fully safeguarded nuclear power began in 1970 when the United States, then Iran’s important ally, lost the ability to recover enough oil to meet demands.  Leaders of both nations recognized that world ability to recover enough oil to meet world demands would be lost in a few decades unless there  were major reductions in use.  Iran signed the  NonProliferation Treaty, ordered five large nuclear power plants from US vendors and was promised (inappropriate) reprocessing technology by the US Department of  State.  The plans were interrupted when President Richard Nixon upheld the Atomic Energy Commission decision to deny promised technology.  Iran cancelled the nuclear power plant orders with US vendors and ordered them from France and Germany, who agreed to supply needed technology.

The Islamic Revolution interrupted Iran’s plans again, but not its recognition of the importance of nuclear power.  Iran’s first nuclear power plant, built with Russian help in the southern port city of Bushehr, is almost ready to begin operation

Because of the past denial of promised nuclear fuel cycle technology, Iran is understandably reluctant to rely  on another nation for continuous supply of low enriched uranium needed for nuclear fuel.

Iran’s leaders know that any action toward building a bomb would be quickly known by the world and justify a military attack on important nuclear power facilities.  They also know that a nuclear weapon would be of no value for Iran’s security or other interests and have clearly stated their intent not to build one.

To make a nuclear weapon, Iran would begin by diverting at least two tons of low enriched uranium hexaflouride gas from fully safeguarded, carefully measured inventories.  Other nations would know about the diversion, which would be  easily and quickly detected by International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors.  If any  nuclear facilities survived the certain attack, Iran would try to further enrich the gas.  But these facilities are not configured for higher enrichment and had earlier processing problems.

If further enrichment was successful, the most dangerous and difficult operations would begin. The highly enriched uranium gas would be converted to metal and weapon components would be fabricated  and assembled with high explosives for a weapon.  These processes have never been used in Iran and facilities for their use almost certainly do not exist.

Potential for a deadly criticality accident in each operation is high.  Assembling metal components with high explosives could result in a nuclear explosion unless done with great care.

The final step would be providing heavy containment to obtain a significant yield.

If all went well, Iran could have a nuclear weapon in about ten years that could be delivered by a truck or large airplane but not an Iranian missile.

Israeli  Prime Minister  Benjamin Netanyahu and Consul-General Reda Mansour in Atlanta, US officials and others  have been told about the long time and difficulties Iran would encounter with an attempt to build a nuclear weapon. Israel’s leaders have stopped making threats against Iran’s nuclear power facilities, but US political leaders, news media and others continue to support sanctions against Iran’s nuclear power programs that will be of no value but will prevent cooperation with Iran to resolve problems and end conflicts and terrorism in the Middle East.

United States and United Nations officials should:

• explain to all nations that Iran’s nuclear power programs are not a nuclear weapon threat
• encourage leaders of Iran, Israel and Arab nations to form a multinational corporation to operate a regional facility in Iran to supply low enriched uranium for nuclear power in the Middle East.
• provide technical assistance to assure safe and successful enrichment facility operation.

A final note: The inability of the DOE to produce nuclear materials and assess nuclear weapon threats in other nations is one of many adverse consequences of U.S. reliance, unique in the world, on a large, politically-dominated federal department to direct and manage policies and programs for complex nuclear and energy technology that is vital to its citizens’ economic well-being.  Changes should be made based on lessons learned  from experiences with nuclear and energy technology since 1942.

Clinton Bastin: (Chemical Engineer/Nuclear Scientist, US Department of Energy – Retired) directed US programs for safe and successful production of nuclear materials and weapons and development of gas centrifuge technology and the successful US nonproliferation initiative with India.  He advised US national security agencies on proliferation threats in other nations and was a lead consultant to the IAEA for its study of Regional Nuclear Fuel Cycle Centers.

Clinton Bastin

  • Vice President for the United States of the World Council of Nuclear Workers

  • Chair of the Georgia Section of the American Nuclear Society

  • Clinton Bastin, a chemical engineering graduate of Georgia Tech (1950), is listed in Who’s Who in Engineering – Ninth Edition, is President of the Kiwanis Club of Northlake Golden K, Vice President for the United States of the World Council of Nuclear Workers, and Chair of the Georgia Section of the American Nuclear Society.

He writes and talks to community groups and others about energy, the environment, national and global security aspects of nuclear technology and materials, and improved human interactions through partnerships.

He worked for the US Department of Energy for more than 40 years in roles ranging from manager for nuclear programs, US coordinator for collaborative nuclear research, technology exchange, and nonproliferation initiatives with other nations and the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Clinton Bastin was in the US Marine Corps during World War II.





January 9, 2011

by crescentandcross  


Afghan War Getting Uglier in 2011′

Obama Eyeing Internet ID for Each American

More Nations Will Recognize Palestinian State, PA Says

Is Blackwater Heading for the Holy Land?

Arab League Chief Rejects Intervention Over Christian Attacks

A Tehran street to be named after Rachel Corrie

Hamas urges Gaza militant groups to stop attacks on Zio=Nazi’s Israhell

Zio=Nazi Gestapo’s uses propaganda like an authoritarian regime

Netanyahu’s cabinet votes to draft more ultra-Orthodox into IDF

Be’er Sheva woman stabbed to death by ex-husband

Clinton seeks stronger ties with Arab allies

The Anatomy of a Massacre

Palestinian plight in southern Lebanon refugee camps

Medics shocked at number of child deformity in last Gaza war

New study from Ann Arbor toxicologist links Fallujah birth defects to U.S. weapons

Zio=Nazi’s Attempt To Blame Victim Fails

Minister Racist Herzog: PM responsible for racism wave

Zio=Nazi’s using Gaza as waste dump



Please check out the brand new book detailing Israel’s deliberate attack on the USS LIBERTY

Posted in UKComments Off on NOVANEWS**NOVANEWS



January 5, 2011

by Michael Leon

“No other offense has ever been visited with such severe penalties as seeking to help the oppressed.”


– Clarence Darrow


Via Norman Finkelstein


Shoah’s pages


January 2011
« Dec   Feb »