Welcome to the Net Muslims Forums.
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 97
  1. #21
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    Israeli car ad boasts run over of kids

    Apr 21, 2011

    A new photo advertisement of a Japanese car in Israel has drawn considerable outrage for its implied promotion of running over Palestinian kids.

    The commercial advertisement, published by a Subaru dealership in Israel, features the scene photographed last year, when an Israeli settler struck two Palestinian children with his car in the East al-Quds (Jerusalem) neighborhood of Silwan before speeding away, Xinhua reported on Thursday.

    "We'll see who can stand against you," reads the Hebrew line to the right corner of the picture.

    The October incident targeted two youngsters, aged 10 and 12, breaking the younger victim's leg.

    Following the attack, the victims initially resisted to be hustled into a car, which apparently meant to take them to a hospital. Palestinian youngsters fear getting into strangers' vehicles because they have seen their friends taken away by Israeli troops posed as civilians on a regular basis.

    The acting Palestinian Authority (PA) Chief Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah party has said the promotion of the act of aggression "is a dirty advertisement and propaganda that reached to the status of calling for [the] killing Palestinian children by running them over."

    The attacker, named David Be'eri, is the director general of Elad, a hard-line real estate development conglomerate.

    The organization encourages Jews to move into dense neighborhoods in East al-Quds.

    East al-Quds forms part of the Palestinian territories, which Tel Aviv occupied in 1967 and later annexed despite international refusal to recognize either aggression. It has been promised as the capital of any future Palestinian state.


    Imagine the international uproar if the Palestinians had posted any such ad against the zionist israelis!

  2. #22
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    Apple Removes 'Third Intifada' App
    Israel Asks Apple: Remove '3rd Intifada' App that facilitates protesting against Zionist Crimes

    Thursday, June 23, 2011

    JERUSALEM, Israel -- Apple Inc. got rid of a free application that Israel said incites violence against the Jewish state.


    Facebook Closes 'Third Palestinian Intifada' Page

    By Tzippe Barrow, CBN News Internet Producer - Jerusalem
    Tuesday, March 29, 2011

    JERUSALEM, Israel - The powers that be at the social networking giant, Facebook, shut down the "Third Palestinian Intifada" page early Tuesday morning, reversing Monday's announcement that the site would be monitored but not closed.



    Apple under fire for pulling Intifada app

    By Catrina Stewart in Jerusalem, Friday, 24 June 2011

    US computer giant Apple has culled a Palestinian application (app) from its iPhone offerings at the request of Israel, which said it incited people to violence against the Jewish State.


  3. #23
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    Here's a ppt on attack on Lebanan in 2006 by the terrorist zionists. Warning: this are graphic pictures of dead bodies by terrorist bombings.
    Attached Files

  4. #24
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    Netanyahu - The Liar.

    The Sarkozy-Obama exchange reflects the world's growing frustration with Netanyahu

    French President Sarkozy overheard telling President Obama that Prime Minister Netanyahu 'a liar' when microphone accidentally left on after G20 summit press conference.

    By Barak Ravid

    If a remark by French President Nicolas Sarkozy publicized Tuesday is any indication, not much is left of what was once a strong friendship between himself and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, dating back to when both men were finance ministers.

    The French president, unaware last Thursday that a mic in the meeting room at the G20 summit at Cannes was on, was heard calling Netanyahu "a liar" in what he thought was a private exchange with U.S. President Barack Obama. "I cannot bear Netanyahu, he's a liar," Sarkozy told Obama, who was also unaware that the mike had been turned on and was being monitored by reporters via the headsets used for simultaneous translations.
    Obama didn't exactly defend Netanyahu, either.

    "You're fed up with him, but I have to deal with him even more often than you," Obama replied, according to wire service reports.

    Obama also complained to Sarkozy about France's vote in favor of Palestinian membership in UNESCO, and asked him to tell the Palestinians to stop their unilateral moves at the United Nations.

    "We'll have to impose economic sanctions on the Palestinians," Obama said.

    Several journalists, including a few from large media organizations, heard the exchange but did not initially report it, agreeing among themselves that to do so would be a violation of journalistic ethics. The remarks appeared Tuesday on a relatively obscure French website that deals with media criticism.

    A Reuters reporter, however, confirmed that he had heard the exchange, and neither the White House nor Elysee Palace issued any denials.

    It is not the only time recently that Sarkozy has expressed his frustration with Netanyahu.

    During a French cabinet meeting a few weeks ago, he told his ministers, "Abu Mazen [Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas] is a statesman, but Netanyahu never misses an opportunity to disappoint us," according to a report in Le Canard Enchaine. "Just now he approved the construction of 1,100 apartments in the Arab section of Jerusalem."

    And while Obama has been restraining himself so as not to alienate voters before the 2012 presidential election, his disdain for Netanyahu is well-known.
    Former U.S. defense secretary Robert Gates reportedly called Netanyahu "ungrateful" in a meeting with Obama before the former left his post this summer, adding that the prime minister was "endangering his country by refusing to grapple with Israel's growing isolation."

    The Prime Minister's Office refused to comment on Tuesday. At the Foreign Ministry, whose head, Avigdor Lieberman, has gotten his own share of insults from Sarkozy, there were some amused responses.

    "It's a good thing the microphones didn't catch what Merkel told Obama about Sarkozy," said one senior official, who refused to be named.

    Vice Premier Silvan Shalom played down the episode: "Everyone talks about everyone. Sometimes even good friends say things about each other, certainly in such competitive professions," Shalom told Army Radio. "So you have to consider the main things. Is Obama a friend of Israel's? Is Sarkozy a friend of Israel's? Is their policy a consistent policy of support for Israel? The answer to all of these questions is affirmative and, as far as I'm concerned, that is what's important."

    The exchange between Sarkozy and Obama is not exceptional; it represents the increasing contempt and frustration many world leaders feel for Netanyahu and the wavering position of the Israeli government in the international arena. Though Netanyahu promised nearly three years ago that he would deliver "surprises" with regard to the peace process and implement historic measures, many world leaders have stopped believing him.

    "I don't believe a word he says," German Chancellor Angela Merkel reportedly said recently, in a closed conversation.

    Earlier this year, Merkel confronted Netanyahu directly, saying, "You've disappointed us. You haven't taken a single step to advance peace."
    Other world leaders, such as British Prime Minister David Cameron, have simply taken to avoiding Netanyahu.

    Meanwhile, two of Netanyahu's only friends of late, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi and Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou have both vowed to resign in the face of their respective countries' economic collapse.Next week Netanyahu will be visiting the Hague, one of the few major cities in which the Israeli prime minister is still received cordially.


  5. #25
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    Who's Burning Palestinian Mosques in the West Bank and Israel?

    There have been six torchings in the West Bank and Israel in the past two years—but not a single indictment.

    Dan Ephron - Dec 13, 2011

    The arsonists crept into the Palestinian village of Brukin in the middle of the night last week—there were at least two and as many as six of them, according to residents. First they set fire to a backhoe and a car, burning them to shells. Then they tried to force open the large metal doors of the town mosque, a stone structure with a blue dome and a minaret that rises high over the West Bank. When that failed, the perpetrators torched the entrance and sprayed graffiti in Hebrew on an outside wall. “They knew the building was new, and they wanted to destroy it,” said Ismail Abu Nasser, a 60-year-old worshiper I met at the mosque on a visit recently.

    The attack marked the sixth time in the past two years that mosques have been burned either in the West Bank or Israel, a trend with potentially volatile consequences. Police link the arsons to a broader uptick in violent acts by Jewish extremists against Palestinians in what the Israeli media have come to refer to euphemistically as “price tag” attacks. A police spokesman told The Daily Beast that authorities set up a special task force two months ago and are taking the incidents very seriously. And yet, in the long months since the first arson took place in late 2009, no one has been indicted and not a single suspect has been held for more than a few days.

    Israel deploys both police and members of its internal security service—known by the acronym Shabak or Shin Bet—to maintain order in the West Bank, which it has occupied since 1967. Most of their law-enforcement effort is aimed at Palestinians, but both bodies also monitor radical settlers. In fact, the Shabak has an entire department devoted to foiling plots by Jewish extremists, a division that has received increasingly more attention and bigger budgets since the 1995 assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin by a religious Jew.

    So why hasn’t more been done about these attacks?

    Police say the cases have gone unresolved mostly because the perpetrators, thought to be wayward youth in their teens and 20s, are not centrally organized. They operate individually or in small teams, and share their plans with no one outside the group. “These aren’t cells so much as a group of individuals operating on their own,” says Chief Inspector Micky Rosenfeld, the foreign-press spokesman for the police and a former counterterrorism officer. With few people in on the secret, the chances of police informants hearing about the attacks are slim, he says.

    But people familiar with the situation in the West Bank say another factor is at work as well: an ingrained reluctance among law enforcers in the West Bank to aggressively pursue fellow Jews. Like other Israelis, policemen are accustomed to viewing Palestinians as enemies. Some are themselves residents of the settlements. “It makes perfect sense that those people are not eager to enforce the law on violent settlers,” says Sarit Michaeli, the spokeswoman for the Israeli human-rights group B’Tselem. She says B’Tselem field workers have seen countless instances when soldiers or police witness settlers abusing Palestinians or uprooting their olive trees and do nothing to stop them. Even when the incidents are caught on tape—B’Tselem has handed out more than 100 video cameras to Palestinians around the West Bank—she says police are slow to respond.

    Even when Jewish suspects are arrested, they don’t usually spend much time in prison. While Palestinians are subject to Israeli military law and can be held for long stretches without a remand, Jews in the two-tier system must be brought before a judge within 24 hours (12 if the suspect is a minor). As a result, police rarely have time to wring confessions from Jewish extremists, who know to keep their mouths shut in lockup (one settler wrote a whole guidebook on how to face down police interrogators). Instead, investigators must rely on old-fashioned detective work to build indictments, like questioning witnesses and taking DNA samples.

    That would be fine, except that wringing confessions—and not doing detective work—appears to be the particular skill set of Israeli law enforcers in the West Bank. Most indictments handed down against Palestinians are based primarily on confessions, according to human-rights groups. As for the shoe leather, an investigation published in the daily Haaretz newspaper last week concluded that policemen in the West Bank “consistently fail to conduct even the most basic investigatory actions, such as taking fingerprints, checking alibis, questioning witnesses, and conducting identification lineups.” Rosenfeld, the police spokesman, says that in the case of the mosque burning at Brukin, detectives did in fact dust for fingerprints and conduct other forensic testing. “We get all the resources to the site and we carry out a proper investigation,” he says. One can only pray.


    Jerusalem mosque set alight in suspected 'price tag' attack

    Jerusalem Mayor denounces arsonists' attack on burial site of noted Muslim figure, saying zero tolerance should be shown to violence of any kind, and that coexistence in the city must be kept.

    By Oz Rosenberg and Nir Hasson - 14.12.11

    Jews set fire to a deserted mosque in central Jerusalem during the night between Tuesday and Wednesday. There was no structural damage reported and the damage mainly consisted of the blackening of walls and graffiti reading “Price Tag,” and anti-Islamic phrases.

    The Nebi Akasha mosque, apparently built under the Ayyubid dynasty in the 12th century with additions made under the Mamluk dynasty in the 13th century. It is believed that the mosque was founded on the burial site of combatants in Saladin’s army, though an ancient tradition designates the site as the place where Akasha, a friend of the Prophet Muhammad, was buried.

    The mosque is uniquely located in central Jerusalem in the midst of a Fundamentalist-Orthodox neighborhood. It was abandoned in the Israeli War of Independence. Its was recently renovated and turned into a municipal storage facility.

    Graffiti spray painted on the historical site included inscriptions such as "Muhammad is Dead," "Muhammad is a Pig," and "Price Tag."

    The Jerusalem municipality closed off the entrance to the mosque, and the police and Shin Bet began an investigation.

    Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat denounced the act adding that adding zero tolerance should be shown to violence of any kind, and that coexistence in the city must be kept at all costs.

    On Thursday, last week, residents of the Palestinian village of Burkina discovered that two vehicles were torched overnight, and that there had been attempt to burn the local mosque as well, succeeding only in burning its entrance. In this incident graffiti of a similar nature was also spray-painted on the mosque walls.

    After an arson attack on a mosque at Tuba-Zangaria in northern Israel in early October, the police assigned a team of the International and Serious Crimes Unit (ISCU) to investigate arson cases. Some so-called ‘hilltop youth’ said that at first they feared the ISCU but after many suspects were arrested only to be subsequently released, their fear subsided.

    In the arson of the Tuba-Zangaria mosque, the entire interior of the went up in flames, causing heavy damage, and holy books inside the mosque were burned. Graffiti with the words “price tag” was also found on its walls.

    In a mosque in the West Bank village of Qusra, south of Nablus, was set on fire in June, hours after Israeli police officers destroyed three illegal structures in the settlement outpost of Migron.

  6. #26
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    Rogue State: Israeli Violations of U.N. Security Council Resolutions

    by Jeremy R. Hammond

    January 27, 2010


    Following is a list of United Nations Security Council resolutions directly critical of Israel for violations of U.N. Security Council resolutions, the U.N. Charter, the Geneva Conventions, international terrorism, or other violations of international law.

    Res. 57
    (Sep. 18, 1948) – Expresses deep shock at the assassination of the U.N. Mediator in Palestine, Count Folke Bernadotte, by Zionist terrorists.

    Res. 89
    (Nov. 17, 1950) – Requests that attention be given to the expulsion of “thousands of Palestine Arabs” and calls upon concerned governments to take no further action “involving the transfer of persons across international frontiers or armistice lines”, and notes that Israel announced that it would withdraw to the armistice lines.

    Res. 93
    (May 18, 1951) – Finds that Israeli airstrikes on Syria on April 5, 1951 constitutes “a violation of the cease-fire”, and decides that Arab civilians expelled from the demilitarized zone by Israel should be allowed to return.

    Res. 100
    (Oct. 27, 1953) – Notes that Israel had said it would stop work it started in the demilitarized zone on September 2, 1953.

    101 (Nov. 24, 1953) – Finds Israel’s attack on Qibya, Jordan on October 14-15, 1953 to be a violation of the cease-fire and “Expresses the strongest censure of that action”.

    Res. 106
    (Mar. 29, 1955) – Condemns Israel’s attack on Egyptian forces in the Gaza Strip on February 28, 1955.

    Res. 111
    (Jan. 19, 1956) – Condemns Israel’s attack on Syria on December 11, 1955 as “a flagrant violation of the cease-fire” and armistice agreement.

    Res. 119
    (Oct. 31, 1956) – Considers that “a grave situation has been created” by the attack against Egypt by the forces of Britain, France, and Israel.

    171 (Apr. 9, 1962) – Reaffirms resolution 111 and determines that Israel’s attack on Syria on March 16-17, 1962 “constitutes a flagrant violation of that resolution”.

    Res. 228
    (Nov. 25, 1966) – “Deplores the loss of life and heavy damage to property resulting from the action” by Israel in the southern Hebron area on November 13, 1966, and “Censures Israel for this large-scale military action in violation of the United Nations Charter” and the armistice agreement between Israel and Jordan.

    Res. 237
    (Jun. 14, 1967) – Calls on Israel “to ensure the safety, welfare and security of the inhabitants where military operations have taken place” during the war launched by Israel on June 5, 1967 “and to facilitate the return of those inhabitants who have fled the areas since the outbreak of hostilities”.

    Res. 242
    (Nov. 22, 1967) – Emphasizes “the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war”, emphasizes that member states have a commitment to abide by the U.N. Charter, and calls for the “Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied” during the June 1967 war.

    Res. 248
    (Mar. 24, 1968) – Observes that the Israeli attack on Jordan “was of a large-scale and carefully planned nature”, “Deplores the loss of life and heavy damage to property”, “Condemns the military action launched by Israel in flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter and the cease-fire resolutions”, and “Calls upon Israel to desist from” further violations of resolution 237.

    Res. 250
    (Apr. 27, 1968) – Considers “that the holding of a military parade in Jerusalem will aggravate tensions in the area and have an adverse effect on a peaceful settlement of the problems in the area” and “Calls upon Israel to refrain from holding the military parade in Jerusalem which is contemplated” for May 2, 1968.

    Res. 251
    (May 2, 1968) – Recalls resolution 250 and “Deeply deplores the holding by Israel of the military parade in Jerusalem” on May 2, 1968 “in disregard of” resolution 250.

    Res. 252
    (May 21, 1968) – “Deplores the failure of Israel to comply with” General Assembly resolutions 2253 and 2254, considers Israel’s annexation of Jerusalem “invalid”, and calls upon Israel “to rescind all such measures already taken and to desist forthwith from taking any further action which tends to change the status of Jerusalem”.

    Res. 256
    (Aug. 16, 1968) – Recalls Israel’s “flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter” condemned in resolution 248, observes that further Israeli air attacks on Jordan “were of a large scale and carefully planned nature in violation of resolution 248”, “Deplores the loss of life and heavy damage to property”, and condemns Israel’s attacks.

    Res. 259
    (Sep. 27, 1968) – Expresses concern for “the safety, welfare and security” of the Palestinians “under military occupation by Israel”, deplores “the delay in the implementation of resolution 237 (1967) because of the conditions still being set by Israel for receiving a Special Representative of the Secretary-General”, and requests Israel to receive the Special Representative and facilitate his work.

    Res. 262
    (Dec. 31, 1968) – Observes “that the military action by the armed forces of Israel against the civil International Airport of Beirut was premeditated and of a large scale and carefully planned nature”, and condemns Israel for the attack.

    (Apr. 1, 1969) – Expresses “deep concern that the recent attacks on Jordanian villages and other populated areas were of a pre-planned nature, in violation of resolutions” 248 and 256, “Deplores the loss of civilian life and damage to property”, and “Condemns the recent premeditated air attacks launched by Israel on Jordanian villages and populated areas in flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter and the cease-fire resolutions”.

    Res. 267
    (Jul. 3, 1969) – Recalls resolution 252 and General Assembly resolutions 2253 and 2254, notes that “since the adoption of the above-mentioned resolutions Israel has taken further measures tending to change the status of the City of Jerusalem”, reaffirms “the established principle that acquisition of territory by military conquest is inadmissible”, “Deplores the failure of Israel to show any regard for the resolutions”, “Censures in the strongest terms all measures taken to change the status of the City of Jerusalem”, “Confirms that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel which purport to alter the status of Jerusalem, including expropriation of land and properties thereon, are invalid and cannot change that status”, and urgently calls on Israel to rescind the measures taken to annex Jerusalem.

    Res. 270
    (Aug. 26, 1969) – “Condemns the premeditated air attack by Israel on villages in southern Lebanon in violation of its obligations under the Charter and Security Council resolutions”.

    Res. 271
    (Sep. 15, 1969) – Expresses grief “at the extensive damage caused by arson to the Holy Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem” on August 21, 1969 “under the military occupation of Israel”, reaffirms “the established principle that acquisition of territory by military conquest is inadmissible”, “Determines that the execrable act of desecration and profanation of the Holy Al-Aqsa Mosque emphasizes the immediate necessity of Israel’s desisting from acting in violation” previous resolutions and rescinding measures to annex Jerusalem, calls on Israel “to observe the provisions of the Geneva Conventions and international law governing military occupation”, and condemns Israel’s failure to comply with previous resolutions.

    Res. 279
    (May 12, 1970) – “Demands the immediate withdrawal of all Israeli armed forces from Lebanese territory.”

    Res. 280
    (May 19, 1970) – Expresses conviction that “that the Israeli military attack against Lebanon was premeditated and of a large scale and carefully planned in nature”, recalls resolution 279 “demanding the immediate withdrawal of all Israeli armed forces from Lebanese territory”, deplores Israel’s violation of resolutions 262 and 270, “Condemns Israel for its premeditated military action in violation of its obligations under the Charter of the United Nations”, and “Deplores the loss of life and damage to property inflicted as a result” of Israeli violations of Security Council resolutions.

    Res. 285
    (Sep. 5, 1970) – “Demands the complete and immediate withdrawal of all Israeli armed forces from Lebanese territory.”

    Res. 298
    (Sep. 25, 1971) – Recalls resolutions 252 and 267 and General Assembly resolutions 2253 and 2254 concerning Israel’s measures to annex Jerusalem, reaffirms “the principle that acquisition of territory by military conquest is inadmissible”, notes “the non-compliance by Israel” of the recalled resolutions, deplores Israel’s failure to respect the resolutions, confirms that Israel’s actions “are totally invalid”, and urgently calls on Israel to rescind its measures and take “no further steps in the occupied section of Jerusalem” to change the status of the city.

    Res. 313
    (Feb. 28, 1972) – “Demands that Israel immediately desist and refrain from any ground and air military action against Lebanon and forthwith withdraw all its military forces from Lebanese territory.”

    Res. 316
    (Jun. 26, 1972) – Deplores “the tragic loss of life resulting from all acts of violence”, expresses grave concern “at Israel’s failure to comply with Security Council resolutions” 262, 270, 280, 285, and 313 “calling on Israel to desist forthwith from any violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Lebanon”, calls on Israel to abide by the resolutions, and condemns “the repeated attacks of Israeli forces on Lebanese territory and population in violation of the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and Israel’s obligations thereunder”.

    Res. 317
    (Jul. 21, 1972) – Notes resolution 316, deplores the fact that Israel had not yet released “Syrian and Lebanese military and security personnel abducted by Israeli armed forces from Lebanese territory” on June 21, 1972, and calls on Israel to release the prisoners.

    Res. 332
    (Apr. 21, 1972) – “Condemns the repeated military attacks conducted by Israel against Lebanon and Israel’s violation of Lebanon’s territorial integrity and sovereignty” in violation of the U.N. Charter, the armistice agreement, and cease-fire resolutions.

    Res. 337
    (Aug. 15, 1972) – Notes “the violation of Lebanon’s sovereignty and territorial integrity” by Israel “and the hijacking, by the Israeli air force, of a Lebanese civilian airliner on lease to Iraqi Airways”, expresses grave concern “that such an act carried out by Israel, a Member of the United Nations, constitutes a serious interference with international civil aviation and a violation of the Charter of the United Nations”, recognizes “that such an act could jeopardize the lives and safety of passengers and crew and violates the provisions of international conventions safeguarding civil aviation”, condemns Israel “for violating Lebanon’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and for the forcible diversion and seizure by the Israeli air force of a Lebanese airliner from Lebanon’s air space”, and considers that Israel’s actions constitute a violation of the armistice agreement, cease-fire resolutions, the U.N. Charter, “the international conventions on civil aviation and the principles of international law and morality”.

    Res. 347
    (Apr. 24, 1974) – “Condemns Israel’s violation of Lebanon’s territorial integrity and sovereignty and calls once more on the Government of Israel to refrain from further military actions and threats against Lebanon”, and calls on Israel “to release and return to Lebanon the abducted Lebanese civilians”.

    Res. 425
    (Mar. 19, 1978) – “Calls for strict respect for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and political independence of Lebanon within its internationally recognized boundaries”, and “Calls upon Israel immediately to cease its military action against Lebanese territorial integrity and withdraw forthwith its forces from all Lebanese territory”.

    Res. 427
    (May 3, 1978) – “Calls upon Israel to complete its withdrawal from all Lebanese territory without any further delay”.

    Res. 446
    (Mar. 22, 1979) – Affirms “once more that the Fourth Geneva Convention … is applicable to the Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem”, “Determines that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East”, “Strongly deplores the failure of Israel to abide by” resolutions 237, 252, and 298, and General Assembly resolutions 2253 and 2254, and calls on Israel “as the occupying Power” to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention, to “rescind its previous measures and to desist from any action which would result in changing the legal status and geographical nature and materially affecting the demographic composition of the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, and, in particular, not to transfer parts of its own civilian population into the occupied Arab territories”.

    Res. 450
    (Jun. 14, 1979) – “Strongly deplores acts of violence against Lebanon that have led to the displacement of civilians, including Palestinians, and brought about destruction and loss of innocent lives”, and calls on Israel to cease actions against Lebanon, “in particular its incursions into Lebanon and the assistance it continues to lend to irresponsible armed groups”.

    Res. 452
    (Jul. 20, 1979) – Strongly deplores “the lack of co-operation of Israel” with the Security Council Commission “established under resolution 446 (1979) to examine the situation relating to settlements in the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem”, considers “that the policy of Israel in establishing settlements in the occupied Arab territories has no legal validity and constitutes a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention”, expresses deep concern at Israel’s policy of constructing settlements “in the occupied Arab territories, including Jerusalem, and its consequences for the local Arab and Palestinian population”, and calls on Israel to cease such activities.

    Res. 465
    (Mar. 1, 1980) – Strongly deplores Israel’s refusal to co-operate with the Security Council Commission, regrets Israel’s “formal rejection of” resolutions 446 and 452, deplores Israel’s decision “to officially support Israeli settlement” in the occupied territories, expresses deep concern over Israel’s settlement policy “and its consequences for the local Arab and Palestinian population”, “Strongly deplores the decision of Israel to prohibit the free travel” of the mayor of Hebron “to appear before the Security Council”, and “Determines that all measures taken by Israel to change the physical character, demographic composition, institutional structure or status of the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, or any part thereof, have no legal validity and that Israel’s policy and practices of settling parts of its population and new immigrants in those territories constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention”.

    Res. 467
    (Apr. 24, 1980) – “Condemns all actions contrary to” resolutions 425, 426, 427, 434, 444, 450, and 459 “and, in particular, strongly deplores” any “violation of Lebanese sovereignty and territorial integrity” and “Israel’s military intervention into Lebanon”.

    Res. 468
    (May 8, 1980) – Expresses deep concern “at the expulsion by the Israeli military occupation authorities of the Mayors of Hebron and Halhoul and the Sharia Judge of Hebron” and “Calls upon the Government of Israel as occupying Power to rescind these illegal measures and facilitate the immediate return of the expelled Palestinian leaders so that they can resume the functions for which they were elected and appointed”.

    Res. 469
    (May 20, 1980) – Recalls the Fourth Geneva Convention “and in particular article 1, which reads ‘The High Contracting Parties undertake to respect and to ensure respect for the present Convention in all circumstances,’ and article 49, which reads ‘Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from the occupied territory to the territory of the occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive”, “Strongly deplores the failure of the Government of Israel to implement Security Council resolution 468”, “Calls again upon the Government of Israel, as occupying Power, to rescind the illegal measures taken by the Israeli military occupation authorities in expelling the Mayors of Hebron and Halhoul and the Sharis Judge of Hebron, and to facilitate the immediate return of the expelled Palestinian leaders, so that they can resume their functions for which they were elected and appointed”.

    Res. 471
    (Jun. 5, 1980) – Recalls “once again” the Fourth Geneva Convention, “and in particular article 27, which reads, ‘ Protected persons are entitled, in all circumstances, to respect for their persons… They shall at all times be humanely treated, and shall be protected especially against all acts of violence or threats thereof…’”, reaffirms the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention “to the Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem”, expresses deep concern “that the Jewish settlers in the occupied Arab territories are allowed to carry arms, thus enabling them to perpetrate crimes against the civilian Arab population”, “Condemns the assassination attempts against the Mayors of Nablus, Ramallah and Al Bireh and calls for the immediate apprehension and prosecution of the perpetrators of these crimes”, “Expresses deep concern that Israel, as the occupying Power, has failed to provide adequate protection to the civilian population in the occupied territories in conformity with the provisions of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War”, calls on Israel “to provide the victims with adequate compensation for the damage suffered as a result of these crimes”, “Calls again upon the government of Israel to respect and to comply with the provisions of” the Fourth Geneva Convention and “the relevant resolutions of the Security Council”, “Calls once again upon all States not to provide Israel with any assistance to be used specifically in connexion [sic] with settlements in the occupied territories”, “Reaffirms the overriding necessity to end the prolonged occupation of Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem”.

    Res. 476
    (Jun. 30, 1980) – Reaffirms that “the acquisition of territory by force is inadmissible”, deplores “the persistence of Israel, in changing the physical character, demographic composition, institutional structure and the status of the Holy City of Jerusalem”, expresses grave concern “over the legislative steps initiated in the Israeli Knesset with the aim of changing the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem”, reaffirms “the overriding necessity to end the prolonged occupation of Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem”, “Strongly deplores the continued refusal of Israel, the occupying Power, to comply with the relevant resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly”, “Reconfirms that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power, which purport to later the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem have no legal validity and constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention”, “Reiterates that all such measures … are null and void and must be rescinded in compliance with the relevant resolutions of the Security Council”, and “Urgently calls on Israel, the occupying Power, to abide by this and previous Security Council resolutions and to desist forthwith from persisting in the policy and measures affecting the character and status of the Holy city of Jerusalem”.

    Res. 478
    (Aug. 20, 1980) – Reaffirms “again that the acquisition of territory by force is inadmissible”, notes “that Israel has not complied with resolution 476”, “Censures in the strongest terms the enactment by Israel of the ‘basic law’ on Jerusalem and the refusal to comply with relevant Security Council resolutions”, “Affirms that the enactment of the ‘basic law’ by Israel constitutes a violation of international law”, “Determines that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power, which have altered or purport to alter the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem, and in particular the recent ‘basic law’ on Jerusalem, are null and void and must be rescinded forthwith”.

    Res. 484
    (Dec. 19, 1980) – Expresses “grave concern at the expulsion by Israel of the Mayor of Hebron and the Mayor of Halhoul”, “Reaffirms the applicability of” the Fourth Geneva Convention “to all the Arab territories occupied by Israel in 1967”, “Calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, to adhere to the provisions of the Convention”, and “Declares it imperative that the Mayor of Hebron and the Mayor of Halhoul be enabled to return to their homes and resume their responsibilities”.

    Res. 487
    (Jun. 19, 1981) – Expresses full awareness “of the fact that Iraq has been a party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons since it came into force in 1970, that in accordance with that Treaty Iraq has accepted IAEA safeguards on all its nuclear activities, and that the Agency has testified that these safeguards have been satisfactorily applied to date”, notes “furthermore that Israel has not adhered to the non-proliferation Treaty”, expresses deep concern “about the danger to international peace and security created by the premeditated Israeli air attack on Iraqi nuclear installations on 7 June 1981, which could at any time explode the situation in the area, with grave consequences for the vital interests of all States”, “Strongly condemns the military attack by Israel in clear violation of the Charter of the United Nations and the norms of international conduct”, “Further considers that the said attack constitutes a serious threat to the entire IAEA safeguards regime which is the foundation of the non-proliferation Treaty”, “Fully recognizes the inalienable sovereign right of Iraq, and all other States, especially the developing countries, to establish programmes of technological and nuclear development to develop their economy and industry for peaceful purposes in accordance with their present and future needs and consistent with the internationally accepted objectives of preventing nuclear-weapons proliferation”, and “Calls upon Israel urgently to place its nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards”.

    Res. 497
    (Dec. 17, 1981) – Reaffirms “that the acquisition of territory by force is inadmissible, in accordance with the United Nations Charter, the principles of international law, and relevant Security Council resolutions”, “Decides that the Israeli decision to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration in the occupied Syrian Golan Heights is null and void and without international legal effect”, “Demands that Israel, the occupying Power, should rescind forthwith its decision”, and “Determines that all the provisions of the” Fourth Geneva Convention “continue to apply to the Syrian territory occupied by Israel since June 1967”.

    Res. 501
    (Feb. 25, 1982) – Reaffirms resolution 425 calling upon Israel to cease its military action against Lebanon.

    Res. 509
    ( Jun. 6, 1982) – “Demands that Israel withdraw all its military forces forthwith and unconditionally to the internationally recognized boundaries of Lebanon”.

    Res. 515
    (Jul. 29, 1982) – “Demands that the Government of Israel lift immediately the blockade of the city of Beirut in order to permit the dispatch of supplies to meet the urgent needs of the civilian population and allow the distribution of aid provided by United Nations agencies and by non-governmental organizations, particularly the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)”.

    Res. 517
    (Aug. 4, 1982) – Expresses deep shock and alarm “by the deplorable consequences of the Israeli invasion of Beirut on 3 August 1982”, “Confirms once again its demand for an immediate cease-fire and withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon”, and “Censures Israel for its failure to comply with” resolutions 508, 509, 512, 513, 515, and 516.

    Res. 518
    (Aug. 12, 1982) – “Demands that Israel and all parties to the conflict observe strictly the terms of Security Council resolutions relevant to the immediate cessation of all military activities within Lebanon and, particularly, in and around Beirut”, “Demands the immediate lifting of all restrictions on the city of Beirut in order to permit the free entry of supplies to meet the urgent needs of the civilian population in Beirut”.

    Res. 520
    (Sep. 17, 1982) – “Condemns the recent Israeli incursions into Beirut in violation of the cease-fire agreements and of Security Council resolutions”, and “Demands an immediate return to the positions occupied by Israel before” September 15, 1982 “as a first step towards the full implementation of Security Council resolutions”.

    Res. 521
    (Sep. 19, 1982) – “Condemns the criminal massacre of Palestinian civilians in Beirut” in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps.

    Res. 573
    (Oct. 4, 1985) – “Condemns vigorously the act of armed aggression perpetrated by Israel against Tunisian territory in flagrant violation of the Charter of the United Nations, international law and norms of conduct”.

    Res. 592
    (Dec. 8, 1986) – Reaffirms that the Fourth Geneva Convention “is applicable to the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem”, and “Strongly deplores the opening of fire by the Israeli army resulting in the death and the wounding of defenceless students”.

    Res. 605
    (Dec. 22, 1987) – “Strongly deplores those policies and practices of Israel, the occupying Power, which violate the human rights of the Palestinian people in the occupied territories, and in particular the opening of fire by the Israeli army, resulting in the killing and wounding of defenceless Palestinian civilians”, and reaffirms the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention “to the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem”.

    Res. 607
    (Jan. 5, 1988) – Expresses “grave concern over the situation in the occupied Palestinian territories”, notes “the decision of Israel, the occupying Power, to ‘continue the deportation’ of Palestinian civilians in the occupied territories”, “Reaffirms once again” the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention “to Palestinian and other Arab territories, occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem”, “Calls upon Israel to refrain from deporting any Palestinian civilians from the occupied territories”, and “Strongly requests Israel, the occupying Power, to abide by its obligations arising from the Convention”.

    Res. 608
    (Jan. 14, 1988) – Reaffirms resolution 607, expresses “deep regret that Israel, the occupying Power, has, in defiance of that resolution, deported Palestinian civilians”, and “Calls upon Israel to rescind the order to deport Palestinian civilians and to ensure the safe and immediate return to the occupied Palestinian territories of those already deported”.

    Res. 611
    (Apr. 25, 1988) – Notes “with concern that the aggression perpetrated” by Israelis on April 16, 1988 “in the locality of Sidi Bou Said”, Tunisia, “has caused loss of human life, particularly the assassination of Mr. Khalil El Wazir”, and “Condemns vigorously the aggression perpetrated … against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Tunisia in flagrant violation of the Charter of the United Nations, international law and norms of conduct”.

    Res. 636
    (Jul. 6, 1989) – Reaffirms resolutions 607 and 608, notes “that Israel, the occupying Power, has once again, in defiance of those resolutions, deported eight Palestinian civilians on 29 June 1989”, Expresses deep regret “the continuing deportation by Israel, the occupying Power, of Palestinian civilians”, “Calls upon Israel to ensure the safe and immediate return to the occupied Palestinian territories of those deported and to desist forthwith from deporting any other Palestinian civilians”, and “Reaffirms that” the Fourth Geneva Convention “is applicable to the Palestinian territories, occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem, and to other occupied Arab territories”.

    Res. 641
    (Aug. 30, 1989) – Reaffirms resolutions 607, 608, and 636, notes that Israel “has once again, in defiance of those resolutions, deported five Palestinian civilians on 27 August 1989”, and “Deplores the continuing deportation by Israel, the occupying Power, of Palestinian civilians”.

    Res. 672
    (Oct. 12, 1990) – “Expresses alarm at the violence which took place” on October 8, 1990, “at the Al Haram al Shareef and other Holy Places of Jerusalem resulting in over twenty Palestinian deaths and to the injury of more than one hundred and fifty people, including Palestinian civilians and innocent worshippers”, “Condemns especially the acts of violence committed by the Israeli forces resulting in injuries and loss of human life”, and “Requests, in connection with the decision of the Secretary-General to send a mission to the region, which the Council welcomes, that he submit a report to it before the end of October 1990 containing his findings and conclusions and that he use as appropriate all the resources of the United Nations in the region in carrying out the mission.”

    Res. 673
    (Oct. 24, 1990) – “Deplores the refusal of the Israeli Government to receive the mission of the Secretary-General to the region”, and “Urges the Israeli Government to reconsider its decision and insists that it comply fully with resolution 672 (1990) and to permit the mission of the Secretary-General to proceed in keeping with its purpose”.

    Res. 681
    (Dec. 20, 1990) – Reaffirms “the obligations of Member States under the United Nations Charter”, reaffirms “also the principle of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war”, expresses alarm “by the decision of the Government of Israel to deport four Palestinians from the occupied territories in contravention of its obligations under the Fourth Geneva Convention” in contravention to resolutions 607, 608, 636, and 641, “Expresses its grave concern over the rejection by Israel of Security Council resolutions” 672 and 673, and “Deplores the decision by the Government of Israel, the occupying Power, to resume deportations of Palestinian civilians in the occupied territories”.

    Res. 694
    (May 24, 1991) – Reaffirms resolution 681 calling on Israel to respect the Fourth Geneva Convention, notes “with deep concern and consternation that Israel has, in violation of its obligations under the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, and acting in opposition to relevant Security Council resolutions, and to the detriment of efforts to achieve a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East, deported four Palestinian civilians” on May 18, 1991, “Declares that the action of the Israeli authorities of deporting four Palestinians … is in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention …, which is applicable to all the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem”, and “Deplores this action and reiterates that Israel, the occupying Power, refrain from deporting any Palestinian civilian from the occupied territories and ensure the safe and immediate return of all those deported”.

    Res. 726
    (Jan. 6, 1992) – Recalls resolutions 607, 608, 636, 641, and 694 calling on Israel to respect the Fourth Geneva Convention, “Strongly condemns the decision of Israel, the occupying Power, to resume deportations of Palestinian civilians”, “Reaffirms the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention … to all the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem”, and “requests Israel, the occupying Power, to ensure the safe and immediate return to the occupied territories of all those deported”.

    Res. 799
    (Dec. 18, 1992) – Reaffirms resolutions 607, 608, 636, 641, 681, 694, and 726 calling on Israel to respect the Fourth Geneva Convention, notes “with deep concern that Israel, the occupying Power, in contravention of its obligations under the Fourth Geneva Convention …, deported to Lebanon” on December 17, 1992 “hundreds of Palestinian civilians from the territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jersualem”, “Strongly condemns the action taken by Israel, the occupying Power, to deport hundreds of Palestinian civilians, and expresses its firm opposition to any such deportation by Israel”, “Reaffirms the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention … to all the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem, and affirms that deportation of civilians constitutes a contravention of its obligations under the Convention”, and “Demands that Israel, the occupying Power, ensure the safe and immediate return to the occupied territories of all those deported”.

    Res. 904
    (Mar. 18, 1994) – Expresses shock at “the appalling massacre committed against Palestinian worshippers in the Mosque of Ibrahim in Hebron” on February 25, 1994 by Jewish settler Baruch Goldstein “during the holy month of Ramadan”, expresses grave concern with “the consequent Palestinian casualties in the occupied Palestinian territory as a result of the massacre, which underlines the need to provide protection and security for the Palestinian people”, notes “the condemnation of this massacre by the entire international community”, “Strongly condemns the massacre in Hebron and its aftermath which took the lives of more than fifty Palestinian civilians and injured several hundred others”, and “Calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, to continue to take and implement measures, including, inter alia, confiscation of arms, with the aim of preventing illegal acts of violence by Israeli settlers”.

    Res. 1073 (Sep. 28, 1996) – Expresses “deep concern about the tragic events in Jerusalem and the areas of Nablus, Ramallah, Bethlehem and the Gaza Strip, which resulted in a high number of deaths and injuries among the Palestinian civilians, and concerned also about the clashes between the Israeli army and the Palestinian police and the casualties on both sides”, and “Calls for the safety and protection for Palestinian civilians to be ensured”.
    Res. 1322
    (Oct. 7, 2000) – Expresses deep concern “by the tragic events that have taken place” since September 28, 2000 “that have led to numerous deaths and injuries, mostly among Palestinians”, “Deplores the provocation carried out at Al-Haram Al-Sharif in Jerusalem” on September 28, 2000 “and the subsequent violence there and at other Holy Places, as well as in other areas throughout the territories occupied by Israel since 1967, resulting in over 80 Palestinian deaths and many other casualties”, “Condemns acts of violence, especially the excessive use of force against Palestinians, resulting in injury and loss of human life”, and “Calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by its legal obligations and its responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention”.

    Res. 1402
    (Mar. 30, 2002) – Expresses grave concern “at the further deterioration of the situation, including the recent suicide bombings in Israel and the military attack against the headquarters of the president of the Palestinian Authority”, “Calls upon both parties to move immediately to a meaningful cease-fire” and “calls for the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Palestinian cities, including Ramallah”.

    Res. 1403
    (Apr. 4, 2002) – Expresses grave concern “at the further deterioration of the situation on the ground” and “Demands the implementation of its resolution 1402 (2002) without delay”.

    Res. 1405
    (Apr. 19, 2002) – Expresses concern for “the dire humanitarian situation of the Palestinian civilian population, in particular reports from the Jenin refugee camp of an unknown number of deaths and destruction”, calls for “the lifting of restrictions imposed, in particular in Jenin, on the operations of humanitarian organizations, including the International Committee of the Red Cross and United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East”, and “Emphasizes the urgency of access of medical and humanitarian organizations to the Palestinian civilian population”.

    Res. 1435
    (Sep. 24, 2002) – Expresses grave concern “at the reoccupation of the headquarters of the President of the Palestinian Authority in the City of Ramallah that took place” on September 19, 2002, demands “its immediate end”, expresses alarm “at the reoccupation of Palestinian cities as well as the severe restrictions imposed on the freedom of movement of persons and goods, and gravely concerned at the humanitarian crisis being faced by the Palestinian people”, reiterates “the need for respect in all circumstances of international humanitarian law, including the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War”, “Demands that Israel immediately cease measures in and around Ramallah including the destruction of Palestinian civilian and security infrastructure”, and “Demands also the expeditious withdrawal of the Israeli occupying forces from Palestinian cities towards the return to the positions held prior to September 2000”.

    Res. 1544
    (May 19, 2004) – Reaffirms resolutions 242, 338, 446, 1322, 1397, 1402, 1405, 1435, and 1515, reiterates “the obligation of Israel, the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by its legal obligations and responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War”, calls “on Israel to address its security needs within the boundaries of international law”, expresses “grave concern at the continued deterioration of the situation on the ground in the territory occupied by Israel since 1967”, condemns “the killing of Palestinian civilians that took place in the Rafah area”, expresses grave concern “by the recent demolition of homes committed by Israel, the occupying Power, in the Rafah refugee camp”, reaffirms “its support for the Road Map, endorsed in resolution 1515”, “Calls on Israel to respect its obligations under international humanitarian law, and insists, in particular, on its obligation not to undertake demolition of homes contrary to that law”, and “Calls on both parties to immediately implement their obligations under the Road Map”.

    Res. 1701
    (Aug. 11, 2006) – Expresses “its utmost concern at the continuing escalation of hostilities in Lebanon and in Israel” that “has already caused hundreds of deaths and injuries” and “extensive damage to civilian infrastructure and hundreds of thousands of internally displaced persons”, and “Calls for a full cessation of hostilities” including “the immediate cessation by Israel of all offensive military operations”.

    Res. 1860
    (Jan. 8, 2009) – Expresses “grave concern at the escalation of violence and the deterioration of the situation, in particular the resulting heavy civilian casualties since the refusal to extend the period of calm”, expresses “grave concern also at the deepening humanitarian crisis in Gaza”, “calls for an immediate, durable and fully respected ceasefire, leading to the full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza”, “Calls for the unimpeded provision and distribution throughout Gaza of humanitarian assistance, including of food, fuel and medical treatment”, and “Condemns all violence and hostilities directed against civilians and all acts of terrorism”.

  7. #27
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    Timeline: Israel's Latest Escalation in Gaza

    Earlier today it was reported that Israel assassinated the leader of Hamas’ military wing, Ahmed Jabari, breaking a tentative truce with Palestinian fighters that had been in place since Monday. The truce followed an escalation in violence that began last Thursday in which six Palestinian civilians were killed, including three children, and more than fifty others injured.
    The IMEU offers the following timeline of the recent violence and a fact sheet on previous Israeli ceasefire violations.


    Following a two-week lull in violence, Israeli soldiers invade Gaza. In the resulting exchange of gunfire with Palestinian fighters, a twelve year-old boy is killed by an Israeli bullet while he plays soccer.

    Shortly afterwards, Palestinian fighters blow up a tunnel along the Gaza-Israel frontier, injuring one Israeli soldier.


    An anti-tank missile fired by Palestinian fighters wounds four Israeli soldiers driving in a jeep along the Israel-Gaza boundary.

    An Israeli artillery shell lands in a soccer field in Gaza killing two children, aged sixteen and seventeen. Later, an Israeli tank fires a shell at a tent where mourners are gathered for a funeral, killing two more civilians and wounding more than two dozen others.


    One Palestinian civilian is killed and dozens more are wounded in Israeli attacks. Four Israeli civilians are also injured as a result of projectiles launched from Gaza, according to the Israeli government.

    During an Israeli government cabinet meeting, Transportation Minister Yisrael Katz urges the government to “cut off the head of the snake… take out the leadership of Hamas in Gaza.” He also calls for a cutting off of water, food, electricity, and fuel shipments to Gaza’s 1.7 million people.

    Palestinian militant factions agree to a truce if Israel ends its attacks.


    Israel breaks two days of calm by assassinating Ahmed Jabari, the head of Hamas' military wing. According to reports, at least eight other Palestinians are killed in Israeli attacks, including at least two children. Palestinian militant groups vow to respond.

    Since Israel’s creation in 1948, Israeli political and military leaders have demonstrated a pattern of repeatedly violating ceasefires with their enemies in order to gain military advantage, for territorial aggrandizement, or to provoke their opponents into carrying out acts of violence that Israel can then exploit politically and/or use to justify military operations already planned.

    The following fact sheet provides a brief overview of some of the most high-profile and consequential ceasefire violations committed by the Israeli military over the past six decades.

    – On 14 November, two days after Palestinian factions in Gaza agree to a truce following several days of violence, Israel assassinates the leader of Hamas’ military wing, Ahmed Jabari, threatening to escalate the violence once again after a week in which at least six Palestinian civilians are killed and dozens more wounded in Israeli attacks.

    - On 9 March, Israel violates an Egyptian-brokered ceasefire and assassinates the head of the Gaza-based Popular Resistance Committees, sparking another round of violence in which at least two-dozen Palestinians are killed, including at least four civilians, and scores more wounded. As usual, Israel claims it is acting in self-defense against an imminent attack being planned by the PRC, while providing no evidence to substantiate the allegation.

    Following the assassination, Israeli journalist Zvi Bar’el writes in Haaretz newspaper:
    "It is hard to understand what basis there is for the assertion that Israel is not striving to escalate the situation. One could assume that an armed response by the Popular Resistance Committees or Islamic Jihad to Israel’s targeted assassination was taken into account. But did anyone weigh the possibility that the violent reaction could lead to a greater number of Israeli casualties than any terrorist attack that Zuhair al-Qaisi, the secretary-general of the Popular Resistance Committees, could have carried out?
    'In the absence of a clear answer to that question, one may assume that those who decided to assassinate al-Qaisi once again relied on the "measured response" strategy, in which an Israeli strike draws a reaction, which draws an Israeli counter-reaction."
    Just over two months prior, on the third anniversary of Operation Cast Lead, Israeli army Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz tells Israel’s Army Radio that Israel will need to attack Gaza again soon to restore its power of “deterrence,” and that the assault must be “swift and painful,” concluding, “we will act when the conditions are right."

    – On 29 October, Israel breaks a truce that has maintained calm for two months, killing five Islamic Jihad members in Gaza, including a senior commander. The following day, Egypt brokers another truce that Israel proceeds to immediately violate, killing another four IJ members. In the violence, a total of nine Palestinians and one Israeli are killed.

    - In November, Israel violates a ceasefire with Hamas and other Gaza-based militant groups that has been in place since June, launching an operation that kills six Hamas members. Militant groups respond by launching rockets into southern Israel, which Israel shortly thereafter uses to justify Operation Cast Lead, its devastating military assault on Gaza beginning on 27 December. Over the next three weeks, the Israeli military kills approximately 1,400 Palestinians, most of them civilians, including more than 300 children. A UN Human Rights Council Fact Finding Mission led by South African jurist Richard Goldstone subsequently concludes that both Israel and Hamas committed war crimes and crimes against humanity during the fighting, a judgment shared by human rights organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch.

    - On 23 July, hours before a widely-reported ceasefire declared by Hamas and other Palestinian groups is scheduled to come into effect, Israel bombs an apartment building in the middle of the night in the densely populated Gaza Strip in order to assassinate Hamas leader Salah Shehada. Fourteen civilians, including nine children, are also killed in the attack, and fifty others are wounded, leading to a scuttling of the ceasefire and a continuation of violence.

    2002 – On 14 January, Israel assassinates Raed Karmi, a militant leader in the Fatah party, following a ceasefire agreed to by all Palestinian militant groups the previous month, leading to its cancellation. Later in January, the first suicide bombing by the Fatah-linked Al-Aqsa Martyr’s Brigade takes place.

    2001 – On 23 November, Israel assassinates senior Hamas militant Mahmoud Abu Hanoud. At the time, Hamas was adhering to an agreement made with PLO head Yasser Arafat not to attack targets inside of Israel. Following the killing, respected Israeli military correspondent of the right-leaning Yediot Ahronot newspaper, Alex Fishman, writes in a front-page story: "We again find ourselves preparing with dread for a new mass terrorist attack within the Green Line [Israel's pre-1967 border]… Whoever gave a green light to this act of liquidation knew full well that he is thereby shattering in one blow the gentleman's agreement between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority; under that agreement, Hamas was to avoid in the near future suicide bombings inside the Green Line...” A week later, Hamas responds with bombings in Jerusalem and Haifa.

    – On 25 July, as Israeli and Palestinian Authority security officials meet to shore up a six-week-old ceasefire, Israel assassinates a senior Hamas member in Nablus. Nine days later, Hamas responds with a suicide bombing in a Jerusalem pizzeria.

    1988 – In April, Israel assassinates senior PLO leader Khalil al-Wazir in Tunisia, even as the Reagan administration is trying to organize an international conference to broker peace between Israelis and Palestinians. The US State Department condemns the murder as an “act of political assassination.” In ensuing protests in the occupied territories, a further seven Palestinians are gunned down by Israeli forces.

    – Following Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in June, and after PLO fighters depart Beirut under the terms of a US-brokered ceasefire, Israel violates the terms of the agreement and moves its armed forces into the western part of the city, where the Palestinian refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila are located. Shortly thereafter, Israeli soldiers surround the camps and send in their local Christian Phalangist allies - even though the long and bloody history between Palestinians and Phalangists in Lebanon is well known to the Israelis, and despite the fact that the Phalangists' leader, Bashir Gemayel, has just been assassinated and Palestinians are rumored (incorrectly) to be responsible. Over the next three days, between 800 and 3,500 Palestinian refugees, mostly women and children left behind by the PLO fighters, are butchered by the Phalangists as Israeli soldiers look on. In the wake of the massacre, an Israeli commission of inquiry, the Kahan Commission, deems that Israeli Defense Minister (and future Prime Minister) Ariel Sharon bears "personal responsibility" for the slaughter.

    – Under Defense Minister Ariel Sharon, Israel repeatedly violates a nine month-old UN-brokered ceasefire with the PLO in Lebanon in an effort to provoke a response that will justify a large-scale invasion of the country that Sharon has been long planning. When PLO restraint fails to provide Sharon with an adequate pretext, he uses the attempted assassination of Israel’s ambassador to England to justify a massive invasion aimed at destroying the PLO – despite the fact that Israeli intelligence officials believe the PLO has nothing to do with the assassination attempt. In the ensuing invasion, more than 17,000 Lebanese are killed.

    – Following a ceasefire agreement arranged by the US and the Soviet Union to end the Yom Kippur War, Israel violates the agreement with a “green light” from US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. According to declassified US documents, Kissinger tells the Israelis they can take a “slightly longer" time to adhere to the truce. As a result, Israel launches an attack and surrounds the Egyptian Third Army, causing a major diplomatic crisis between the US and Soviets that pushes the two superpowers to the brink of nuclear war, with the Soviets threatening to intervene to save their Egyptian allies and the US issuing a Defcon III nuclear alert.

    - Israel violates the 1949 Armistice Agreement, launching a surprise attack against Egypt and Syria. Despite claims that Israel is acting in self-defense against an impending attack from Egypt, Israeli leaders are well aware that Egypt poses no serious threat. Yitzhak Rabin, Chief of the General Staff of the Israeli army during the war, says in a 1968 interview that "I do not believe that Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent into Sinai on 14 May would not have been enough to unleash an offensive against Israel. He knew it and we knew it." And former Prime Minister Menachem Begin later admits that "Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai approaches did not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him."

    - Colluding with Britain and France, Israel violates the 1949 Armistice Agreement by invading Egypt and occupying the Sinai Peninsula. Israel only agrees to withdraw following pressure from US President Dwight Eisenhower.

    – Immediately after the UN-brokered Armistice Agreement between Israel and its neighbors goes into effect, the armed forces of the newly-created Israeli state begin violating the truce with encroachments into designated demilitarized zones and military attacks that claim numerous civilian casualties.

    [This piece originally published by the Institute for Middle East Understanding.]

  8. #28
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    UC Irvine students pass historic legislation urging divestment from human rights abuses in Palestine

    (IRVINE, CALIF., 11/13/2012) – In an historic move that could initiate a domino effect across America’s campuses, the Associated Students of UC Irvine voted unanimously to divest from companies that profit from Israel’s occupation of Palestine, including from companies that contribute to illegal settlement construction in the occupied Palestinian territories.

    With 16 votes in favor, 0 abstentions, and 0 opposed, the elected undergraduate student representatives of the University of California Irvine unanimously passed a resolution urging the University to withdraw its investment funds from Caterpillar, General Electric Company, Hewlett Packard, Raytheon, and other companies profiting from human rights violations in the occupied territories. The students also pledged to further examine UC assets for investments in companies that profit from human rights abuses anywhere in the world.

    The resolution was drafted in response to the 2005 Palestinian civil society call for boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel as a means to force it to comply with international law and end its occupation of the West Bank and Gaza; allow Palestinian refugees their internationally guaranteed right to return to their homes and villages; and grant equal rights to Palestinian citizens of Israel. Other divestment successes have occurred at Hampshire College and Evergreen State College, as well as the WeDivest campaign which focuses on pension fund giant TIAA CREF and has resulted in, among other things, the removal of Caterpillar from its Social Choice Funds.

    Sabreen Shalabi, the student representative on the legislative council for the school of social science and co-author of the legislation said, “I am very proud of my fellow council members and of the students at our University. Our work today stands tall in the noble tradition of students advocating for justice, joining the ranks of those brave and visionary students who demanded that our Universities divest from the terrible crimes of South African apartheid.”

    Traci Ishigo, President of the Associated Student of UCI and a member of the UC Irvine Foundation, said “The decision made by ASUCI’s legislative Council tonight clearly shows the strength and integrity of students utilizing their collective power to protect human rights on a global scale and I stand firmly by the students who believe it is their responsibility to have a voice on matters that urge the UC to be an institution that treasures human dignity.”

    To read the text of the legislation, go to http://www.asuci.uci.edu/legislative/legislations/print.php?cnum=R48-15&gov_branch=ASUCI

  9. #29
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    If you really want to help the people of Palestine/Gaza then start by not supporting Israel! Start by not funding the Terrorists and loading their guns to fire at innocent defenseless people. Don't just like, share and spread to make more people aware. Go to http://www.inminds.com/boycott-brands.html for more information!

    Since Israel’s creation in 1948, its political and military leaders have repeatedly violated ceasefires -- usually to to provoke their opponents into carrying out acts of violence that it can then exploit politically or use to justify its own aggressions, which are already planned. "Operation Pillar of Justice" is just one more instance in a long series. On Nov. 12, Palestinian factions in Gaza agreed to a truce following several days of violence. On Nov. 14, Israel broke it -- assassinating a top government official in Gaza and starting "Operation Pillar of Justice." Thanks Dr.Ramy for sharing it with us!


  10. #30
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    Israel has been chosen to host the next UEFA U21 Football Championship.

    We urge you to also write to Mr. Platini, for UEFA to reverse their decision, please use the link to write


    The Israeli government has approved the construction of 3,000 new homes in illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank, less than 24 hours after the UN voted for Palestine to be upgraded to a non-member observer state, according to Israeli media reports.

    The homes will be built both in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, but the government did not stipulate in which settlements.

  11. #31
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    Stephen Hawking Israel Boycott: 7 Celebrities Who've Done It Too

    British physicist Professor Stephen Hawking has announced his withdrawal from the upcoming Israeli conference in Jerusalem as part of an academic boycott to protest Israel’s treatment of Palestinians.

    After initially agreeing to attend the Israeli Presidential Conference, hosted by Israeli President Shimon Peres, the world-renowned scientist has now changed his mind.

    According to a statement by the British Committee for the Universities of Palestine, Hawking’s move was “his independent decision to respect the boycott, based upon his knowledge of Palestine and on the unanimous advice of his own academic contacts there.”

    Hawking’s decision to boycott, however, is not unaccompanied.

    Stephen Hawking's boycott hits Israel where it hurts: science


    Here’s a list of numerous celebrities from across the globe who have also boycotted the country in an effort to promote the Palestinian cause:

    1. Stevie Wonder

    Performer Stevie Wonder decided not to perform as a gala benefit for Friends of the Israel Defence Forces' in Los Angeles last December.

    "Given the current and very delicate situation in the Middle East, and with a heart that has always cried for world unity, I will not be performing at the FIDF Gala," Wonder said in a Guardian article. "I am and have always been against war, any war, anywhere."

    2. Meg Ryan

    In 2010, Hollywood actress Meg Ryan cancelled plans to attend the Jerusalem film festival after an Israeli raid on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla left nine dead earlier that year.

    Although Ryan did not specifically cite the country's actions as a reason for opting out of the event, associate director of the Jerusalem Cinemateque, Yigal Molad Hayo, said "it became quite clear that [it] was the reason."

    "A day after the flotilla incident we got an email saying she was not going to attend," said Hayo in a Guardian article. "Although they claimed it was because she was too busy it was clear to me that it probably had something to do with what had happened."

    3. Dustin Hoffman

    Actor Dustin Hoffman also joined his colleague Meg Ryan in opting out of the annual Jerusalem film festival following Israel's raid in 2010.

    4. Elvis Costello

    In 2010, Singer-songwriter Elvis Costello cancelled two summer performances in Israel citing that it was "a matter of instinct and conscience" to protest the treatment of Palestinians.

    "There are occasions when merely having your name added to a concert schedule may be interpreted as a political act ..." Costello wrote on his website. "And it may be assumed that one has no mind for the suffering of the innocent."

    5. Julianne Moore

    In August 2010, a new cultural hall in the West Bank settlement of Ariel prompted a group of Israeli directors, actors and playwrights to perform in the building in protest of Israel's policies towards Palestinians.

    Oscar-nominated actress Julianne Moore joined numerous other Hollywood stars in lending her support to the boycott by signing a statement by the group Jewish Voice for Peace that praised the Israeli artists for having "refused to allow their work to be used to normalize a cruel occupation which they know to be wrong, which violates international law and which is impeding the hope for a just and lasting peace for Israelis and Palestinians alike."

    6. Ken Loach

    British-based director Ken Loach pulled his film Looking for Eric out of the Melbourne International Film festival in 2009 after organized refused to reject Israeli government sponsorship.

    According to a Daily Telegraph article, Loach, who objected to Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories, were "part of an orchestrated campaign to target events that receive financial support from Israel."

    7. Emma Thompson

    Two-time Oscar winner Emma Thompson joined a group of 35 other artists protesting the participation of Tel Aviv’s Habima theatre at the Globe to Globe festival in London last summer. The Israeli theatre group was invited to perform The Merchant of Venice at the Shakespeare festival.

    Thompson together with her fellow actors and industry artists signed a letter that argued Habima had “a shameful record of involvement with illegal Israeli settlements in Occupied Palestinian Territory. Last year, two large Israeli settlements established "halls of culture" and asked Israeli theatre groups to perform there. A number of Israeli theatre professionals — actors, stage directors, playwrights — declared they would not take part.”


    Last edited by islamirama; Jul-14-2014 at 12:43 PM.

  12. #32
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    Israel To Pay Students For Pro-Israeli Social Media Propaganda


    Israel has announced it will pay university students to circulate pro-Israeli information on social media networks, without having to identify themselves as working for the government.
    The move was publicised in a statement from Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office, the Associated Press reported. Students will receive scholarships to "engage international audiences online" and combat anti-Semitism and calls to boycott Israel, it was alleged.

    In 2012, a Palestinian-run blog reported similar arrangements between the National Union of Israeli Students and the Israeli government. Students would be paid $2,000 to post pro-Israel messages online for five hours a week.

    According to Israeli daily newspaper Haaretz, the most recent proposition is being spearheaded by Danny Seaman, who was slammed by the media for writing anti-Muslim messages on Facebook.

    Students will be organised into units at each university, with a chief co-ordinator who receives a full scholarship, three desk co-ordinators for language, graphics and research who receive lesser scholarships and students termed “activists” who will receive a “minimal scholarship”, the Independent reported.



    They are doing this for decades, spending millions on PR world wide. They even have professional firms hired to do this for them, so nothing new here.

    I thought they'd already been doing this for some time. It's getting bad when you've got to pay people to say nice things about you.

    They have been doing this for decades. I wonder why they've only just admitted to it.

    The truth is the best defence against paid propaganda merchants.

    Last edited by islamirama; Jul-10-2014 at 02:17 PM.

  13. #33
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    As Jews we say "Birthright" trips must end

    Electronic Intifada - As the summer months approach, thousands of young Jews from more than 60 countries prepare to participate in the Taglit-Birthright program. Since 1999, Birthright has brought 340,000 young Jews to Israel on free ten-day trips. In the midst of the fervor to sign up for this bi-annual program, we have launched the website Renounce Birthright (renouncebirthright.org) with the aim of providing a space for potential participants to engage with critiques of Birthright and of Zionism.

    We are non-Israeli Jews who oppose the program because it promotes and supports Israel’s ongoing colonialism and apartheid policies, and marginalizes Jewish experiences in the diaspora. We are calling for the end of the Birthright program, and encourage individuals to boycott the trips.

    Birthright was created in response to concerns over increasing rates of intermarriage, the perceived “crisis of continuity” and the weakening of Jewish communal ties. Over the course of the last decade, the program has worked to create and maintain commitment to Zionism and Israel on the part of non-Israeli Jews.

    Exclusive ideology

    Birthright’s mission, according to the organization, is to “diminish the growing division between Israel and Jewish communities around the world; strengthen the sense of solidarity among world Jewry; and strengthen participants’ personal Jewish identity and connection to the Jewish people.”

    The idea of strengthening “solidarity among world Jewry,” “personal Jewish identity,” and Israel’s “connection to the Jewish people” through trips to Israel is based on a conflation of Judaism with Zionism. Judaism is a religion. Political Zionism is a movement based on the belief that Jews have a right to settle in modern-day Israel, to the exclusion of the indigenous Palestinians.

    The term “Birthright” itself is telling. Like its American counterpart, the ideology of manifest destiny, it operates under the premise that all Jewish people have an exclusive “right” to Palestinian land. In both the American and Israeli contexts, the only way to secure that “right” is through violence, land theft and displacement.

    Settler-colonialism must be opposed, no matter where it takes place. For non-Israeli Jews living in other settler-colonial countries, we must also be accountable to other processes of de-colonization. No group of people have the right to live anywhere that mandates the explicit exclusion of anyone else.

    The establishment of the Israeli state, and the alleged Jewish “birthright,” involved the violent displacement of several hundred thousand indigenous Palestinians, and the destruction of hundreds of Palestinian villages. A Palestinian refugee population of nearly 7 million people is to this day excluded from returning to their lands by Israeli state discrimination.

    In contemporary Israel — where approximately one-fifth of the population is Palestinian — the rights of citizenship (ezrahut) and nationality (le’um) are intentionally distinct. Palestinians born within the 1949 armistice line are considered citizens (and not nationals). Meanwhile a Jew born and raised in New York has a “birthright” to the Israeli state in Palestine, is considered a national, and can almost immediately become a citizen upon emigrating.

    Maintaining a myth

    Birthright in particular — as a part of the Zionist project — relies on the belief that non-Israeli Jews are national-citizens-in-waiting, a reality from which Palestinian refugees are forever excluded.

    We would have no “Birthright” without Israeli occupation and apartheid — it is how Zionism sustains the myth of “a land without a people, for a people without a land.”

    Birthright has spent more than $600 million since its inception in 1999. The organization has three major sources of funding: the Israeli government (which committed another $100 million to Birthright in 2011), wealthy donors such as Charles Bronfman, and Jewish federations across North America (“The romance of Birthright Israel,” The Nation, 15 June 2011).

    In a 2012 speech delivered to Birthright participants, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said: “So when you go out and people tell you things about Israel, tell them about what you saw. Make sure when you go back home, tell them about the real Israel” (“PM Netanyahu’s speech at Taglit-Birthright Israel mega-event”).

    Convincing non-Israeli Jews to defend Netanyahu’s “real Israel” is an integral part of Birthright, and helps explain the government’s investment in the program.

    The program’s largest financial supporter, billionaire Sheldon Adelson — who has provided $140 million to the program — was described in The New York Times last year as having “disgust for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict” (“What Sheldon Adelson wants,” 23 June 2012).

    Beyond individual donors, non-Israeli Jewish community organizations and institutions — such as the Jewish Federations of North America and the Jewish Agency for Israel— support Birthright economically and politically.


    In the name of diasporic Jewish communities, these organizations invest millions of dollars into the promotion of Birthright’s political Zionism, rather than in local projects.

    Despite all this, Birthright claims to be apolitical. In 2006, Birthright Director of Marketing Gidi Mark said: “I don’t think it’s political for Jews to support Israel” (“Come, see Palestine!” Salon.com, 5 June 2006).

    However, the establishment and maintenance of an exclusively Jewish Israel — through forcible displacement, land theft, occupation, segregation, institutionalized racism and systemic discrimination — is political at its core, and is both supported and reinforced by the Birthright program.

    For instance, during the trip, approximately 10,000 Birthright participants visit theAhava cosmetics factory each year; Ahava is located in the illegally-occupied West Bank settlement of Mitzpe Shalem. Ahava directly profits from the exploitation of Palestinian Dead Sea resources.

    Moreover, disturbing accounts of explicit racism have arisen in recent years; former participants often recount how the language used by Birthright personnel demonizes Palestinians. One past attendee said her Birthright tour guide told her group that “Arabs have wanted to kill Jews forever, that they are ‘like mosquitoes’ we must swat away” (“So you’re thinking of Birthright,” Mondoweiss, 20 December 2012).

    Zionism is a political project, and Birthright is perhaps the most tangible manifestation of that political project outside Israel. As such, we must recognize our engagements with Birthright as a question of politics, and not just “a free vacation.”

    Narrow confines

    In reinforcing the belief that what it means to be Jewish is to be Zionist (particularly for non-Israeli Jewish youth), Birthright perpetuates a single narrative about what it means to be Jewish outside of Israel, and who can be a Jew.

    Jewish people speak and have spoken an array of languages, live and have lived across the world, and possess different histories that extend beyond the narrow confines of political Zionism and the nation-state of Israel.

    It is contemporary political Zionism that has “othered” Mizrahi/Arab-Jews, as New York University professor Ella Shohat explains, by urging Arab Jews “to see their only real identity as Jewish,” such that their “Arabness, the product of millennial cohabitation, is merely a diasporic stain to be ‘cleansed’ through assimilation” (“The invention of the Mizhahim,” Journal of Palestine Studies, Volume 29, No. 1, Autumn 1999).

    Further, Israel’s policy towards Ethiopian Jews in recent years demonstrates how the limits of Jewishness are often defined through Zionism. There is a clear tension between Birthright’s claim to promote diasporic life, and the fact that it the program is so deeply rooted in Zionism, an ideology that homogenizes the experiences and identities of Jews.

    Our alleged Birthright can only exist through the suppression and erasure of many Jewish identities, histories and experiences.

    Liberation in Palestine is a question of land, colonialism and apartheid — not religion. The work of Jewish and Israeli organizations and collectives such as Zochrot, Boycott from Within, the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network, and Israeli Queers Against Apartheid attests to this fact.

    As scholar Judith Butler has explained: “there have always been Jewish traditions that oppose state violence, that affirm multi-cultural co-habitation, and defend principles of equality, and this vital ethical tradition is forgotten or sidelined when any of us accept Israel as the basis of Jewish identification or values” (“Judith Butler responds to attack,” Mondoweiss, 27 August 2012).

    No right to apartheid

    We have founded Renounce Birthright because Birthright demands our complicity in two intersecting (but distinct) forms of violence: first, the occupation of Palestine and the Israeli government’s brutal regime of apartheid and second, the erasure and suppression of diverse Jewish experiences and communities across the world.

    In organizing for Palestinian liberation, we are deeply committed to the belief that Jewish experiences and narratives — particularly North American Jewish experiences, including our own — should not be centered.

    As Mezna Qato and Kareem Rabie explained in their recent article for Jacobinmagazine: “the left often neglects these anti-colonial principles and seeks out Jewish voices to validate Palestinian claims. In turn, it privileges Jewish discourse, anxieties, and histories in ways that marginalize Palestinians in their own struggle” (“Against the Law,” Spring 2013).

    We recognize that our struggles are greatly distinct yet related, and are engaged in this project first and foremost from a position of solidarity.

    We call on non-Israeli Jews across the diaspora to join us in renouncing Birthright— and our privileged legal relationship to the Israeli state — because we have no right to apartheid and colonialism.


  14. #34

  15. #35
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    Israel’s SodaStream closes main UK store after 2-yr boycott campaign

    July 06, 2014

    SodaStream, which has its main factory in the West Bank and makes home carbonation products, has closed its EcoStream shop in Brighton and one of Britain’s biggest retailers John Lewis will no longer stock its products after two years of protests.

    EcoStream, which sold recyclable bottles produced by the Israeli-owned SodaStream Corporation, was closed despite reporting running a profit since it was opened two years ago.

    EcoStream bottles were produced at a factory in the Mishor Adumim industrial zone in the Israeli West Bank settlement of Ma’ale Adumim.

    The EcoStream store in Brighton, on England’s south coast, was closed Monday and the department store chain John Lewis announced Tuesday that it will be withdrawing all SodaStream products from its shelves.

    SodaStream did not link the decisions to the protest campaign against the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian West Bank.

    In a statement issued Wednesday in relation to the closure of store in Brighton and John Lewis’ decision to pull its products, SodaStream did not mention the protests, which are known as the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement.

    “Following a two-year test period, the company has decided to focus its business efforts on other channels. The business in the UK is on a high growth pattern, with over 20 percent year-on-year growth and rolling out to new retail stores across the country,” said a spokeswoman for the company, according to the Jewish Chronicle.

    SodaStream’s decision to close the shop follows two years of weekly Saturday demonstrations outside the store by the Brighton and Hove Palestine Solidarity Campaign.

    In London, the Palestine Solidarity Campaign has also organized protests every fortnight outside John Lewis’ flagship Oxford Street store. The protest group has also been in direct communication with the CEO of John Lewis, Andy Street, urging him to put ethics before profits.

    Sarah Colborne, the director of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, attributed the closure of the Brighton store as well the decision by John Lewis, directly to the pressure from the BDS movement.

    “The news that SodaStream is closing its main UK store and that John Lewis is taking Soda Stream products off its shelves is a major success for the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement,” she said, according to Haaretz.

    SodaStream by locating its factory in an illegal settlement is complicit in Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land,” she added.

    But SodaStream maintains that its operation in the West Bank contributes to Israeli-Palestinian coexistence and says its Mishor Adumim factory employs hundreds of Palestinians.

    Scarlett Johansson [Jewish] sparked a heated debate earlier this year, when she accepted the role of spokeswoman for SodaStream, much to the dismay of supporters of the BDS movement.


  16. #36
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    France advises its citizens against doing business in illegal Israeli settlements

    June 26, 2014

    France has warned its citizens against taking part in any economic activity in the occupied Palestinian territories, saying this may entail legal risks because the Jewish settlements are illegal under international law.

    The warning is part of a joint act drafted by the five largest EU countries: Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Italy, and Spain, Haaretz cited a French diplomat as saying.

    Italy and Spain are expected to issue similar warnings over the next few days, while the UK and Germany did so a few months ago.

    The move comes after the failure of peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians, and also following massive protests against the construction of settlements across the EU.

    The notice by the French Foreign Ministry advises against investing, purchasing land, or engaging in economic activity in the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Golan Heights. It was published as part of recommendations for French people traveling to Israel.

    “Due to the fact that the settlements are illegal in international law, the performance of financial activity in the settlements such as money transfers, investments, acquisition of property, provision of supplies or the performance of any other economic activities that benefit the settlements involves risks,” the statement reads in French.

    The document also stated that the international community does not recognize the settlements as part of Israel, which could lead to “land disputes or disagreements regarding water, quarries or other natural resources.”

    “We call upon citizens or businesspeople who are considering becoming involved in economic activity in the settlements to seek appropriate legal advice before going ahead,” the statement adds.

    The warning from the French government is non-binding, so a French national who conducts financial activities in the settlements would not be breaking the law in France. However, over the last year, Europe’s private sector and Israeli businesses that work in the settlements have seen boycotts of their goods and services.

    The Dutch government has recently issued a similar warning to its citizens, with recommendations that products from the settlements on sale in supermarkets are to be marked. Shortly afterwards, the largest water company in The Netherlands declared that it was canceling a contract with Mekorot, Israel’s national water company.

    About a week ago, the Israeli Foreign Ministry asked its ambassadors across the EU to contact European foreign ministries, asking them to refrain from issuing the warnings.


    Spain, Italy warn against investing in Israeli settlements

    June 27, 2014

    Spain and Italy have joined France in advising their citizens not to invest in Israeli settlements built on occupied Palestinian Land.

    The Italian Foreign Minister Frederico Mogherini told Italians on Friday “not to get involved in financial activity and investments” in settlements in the West Bank, Italian media reported.

    France, Germany and Britain have already issued similar advisories, as the international community regards all Israeli settlements built on occupied land as illegal.

    The Italian announcement comes after Spain issued a similar warning on Thursday. An announcement on the Spanish foreign ministry website cited European Union policy, which deems all Israeli settlements in the West Bank, eastern Jerusalem and Golan, illegal.The statement said these settlements “constitute an obstacle to peace” and hinder trying to achieve a two-state solution to end the Israeli Palestinian conflict.

    “The potential buyers and investors should know that a future peace accord between Israel and the Palestinians or between Israel and Syria could have consequences both for properties acquired and for economic activities promoted in said settlements. In case of litigation, it could be very difficult for member states to guarantee the protection of their interests,” the Spanish statement said.

    A spokesman for the Spanish foreign ministry insisted that his government is not calling for a boycott on Israel.

    “The statement is not intended as a call for a boycott in any way, or to limit economic cooperation between Spain and Israel within its internationally-recognized borders,” Carlos Entrena Moratiel, told JTA, an international Jewish news agency.

    France posted a statement on its foreign ministry website on Thursday explaining that French citizens who go ahead with investments in the occupied territories should seek legal advice before proceeding.

    The toughening of rhetoric from Europe has in part come about because of the collapse of Israeli Palestinian peace talks in April.

    Israel does not believe settlements in the West Bank are illegal and considers all of Jerusalem and the Golan Heights to be part of its territory. Just on June 5, some 1,500 tenders were issued for new settlement housing units. The Housing Ministry explained the move as a response to Palestine forming a unity government which included Hamas.

    Ten days later after the tender was published, Israel’s Foreign Ministry asked its ambassadors across the EU to contact European foreign ministries, asking them to refrain from issuing the warnings against associating with settlement businesses. In January, similar calls were made with Israel accusing the EU ofa “one-sided stance” against the Jewish state.


  17. #37
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    World Cup Star Cristiano Ronaldo refuse to exchange Jersey with Israel players

    Cristiano Ronaldo rejected the call for a meeting from the Israeli President.

    He has already been to Israel but as he faced with the Israeli crimes he refused further travel and said: “If I say that I love Israel like many other players, I would be chosen as the world best player every year! But people know that my rights have been taken away in recent years!

    However, I will never say such a thing and I have always hated Israel.

    I support Palestine and those innocent children who get killed out of injustice.

    Ronaldo said: “I do not exchange my shirt with ASSASSINS”

    This was a phrase used by the Portuguese star Cristiano at a meeting after a friendly playoff between Israel and Portugal before the World Cup.

    After the match, an Israeli player removing his shirt offered it to Ronaldo, who refused because he could not agree to wear a jersey on which there was the flag of the State of Israel.

    In the locker room when reporters asked him why he had refused to exchange his jersey, he said “I do not exchange my shirt with murderers” (Google English translation).

    A Real Euro-star: Cristiano Ronaldo, who became the world’s most expensive footballer when he joined Real Madrid for £80 million from Manchester United, made his full international debut for Portugal in 2003.

    This is not the first time the Portuguese star Ronaldo has shown his solidarity with Palestinians, last year he auctioned off his soccer boot in gold, to help Palestinian victims of Israeli bombing.

    Original source: http://streettelevirtuelle.wordpress.com/2013/04/17/sport-je-nechange-pas-mon-maillot-avec-des-assassins-cristiano-ronaldo-apres-le-match-portugal-israel

    Rapper Talib Kweli takes stand for Palestine, cancels Israel gig

    Rapper Talib Kweli (talibkweli.com) has canceled plans to perform in Israel after appeals by supporters of the Palestinian campaign for boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS).“As much as I want to play Israel, I have decided not to in solidarity with Palestinians who will not have access to my show,” he wrote on Twitter.“After days of discussions with many, I’ve decided to try and visit Israel and Palestine with those who fight to end the state of apartheid rather than use my art to force the issue on those who would rather not deal with it.”

    Talib Kweli said that speaking to members of the Palestinian rap group DAM helped him make up his mind:

    He continued to engage on Twitter with both critics and supporters of his decision.
    “The responses on twitter from BDS supporters were compassionate, measured, informed and respectful for the most part,” he wrote.
    Talib Kweli has previously referenced the struggle for justice in Palestine in his work.Palestinian American rap journalist Sama’an Ashrawi summed up the feelings of many with his response to Talib Kweli’s stance:


  18. #38
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    The searing hypocrisy of the West


    Palestinian children are assaulted or murdered every day and barely do their lives register in western press. No mother should have endure the murder of her child. No mother or father. That does not only apply to Jewish parents. The lives of our children are no less precious and their loss are no less shattering and spiritually unhinging. But there is a terrible disparity in the value of life here in the eyes of the state and the world, where Palestinian life is cheap and disposable, but Jewish life is sacrosanct.

    The bodies of three Israeli settlers who went missing on June 12th were found in a hastily dug shallow grave in Halhul, north of Hebron.

    Since the teens went missing from Gush Etzion, a Jewish-only colony in the West Bank, Israel has besieged the 4 million Palestinians who already live under its thumb, storming through towns, ransacking homes and civil institutions, conducting night raids on families, stealing property, kidnapping, injuring, and killing. Warplanes were dispatched to bomb Gaza, again and repeatedly, destroying more homes and institutions and carrying out extrajudicial executions. Thus far, over 570 Palestinians have been kidnapped and imprisoned, most notably a Samer Issawi, the Palestinian who went on a 266-day hunger strike in protest of a previous arbitrary detention. At least 10 Palestinians have been killed, including at least three children, a pregnant woman, and a mentally ill man. Hundreds have been injured, thousands terrorized.

    Universities and social welfare organizations were ransacked, shut down, their computers and equipment destroyed or stolen, and both private and public documents confiscated from civil institutions. This wonton thuggery is official state policy conducted by its military and does not include the violence to persons and properties perpetuated by paramilitary Israeli settlers, whose persistent attacks against Palestinian civilians have also escalated in the past weeks. And now that the settlers are confirmed dead, Israel has vowed to exact revenge. Naftali Bennet, Economy Minister said, “There is no mercy for the murderers of children. This is the time for action, not words.”

    Although no Palestinian faction has claimed responsibility for the abduction, and most, including Hamas, deny any involvement, Benjamin Netanyahu is adamant that Hamas is responsible. The United Nations requested that Israel provide evidence to support their contention, but no evidence has been forthcoming, casting doubt on Israel’s claims, particularly in light of its public ire over the recent unification of Palestinian factions and President Obama’s acceptance of the new Palestinian unity.

    In the West, headlines over pictures of the three Israeli settler teens referred to Israel’s reign of terror over Palestine as a “manhunt” and “military sweep.” Portraits of innocent young Israeli lives emerged from news outlets and the voices of their parents are featured in the fullness of their anguish. The US, EU, UK, UN, Canada and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) condemned the kidnapping and called for their immediate and unconditional release. Upon discovery of the bodies, there has been an outpouring of condemnation and condolences.

    President Obama said, “As a father, I cannot imagine the indescribable pain that the parents of these teenage boys are experiencing. The United States condemns in the strongest possible terms this senseless act of terror against innocent youth.”

    Although hundreds of Palestinian children are kidnapped, brutalized or killed by Israel, including several in the past two weeks, there is rarely, if ever, such a reaction from the world.

    Just prior to the disappearance of the Israeli settler teens, the murder of two Palestinian teens was caught on a local surveillance camera. Ample evidence, including the recovered bullets and a CNNcamera filming an Israeli sharpshooter pulling the trigger at the precise moment one of the boys was shot indicated that they were killed in cold blood by Israeli soldiers. There were no condemnations or calls for justice for these teens by world leaders or international institutions, no solidarity with their grieving parents, nor mention of the more than 250 Palestinian children, kidnapped from their beds or on their way to school, who continue to languish in Israeli jails without charge or trial, physically and psychologically tortured. This is to say nothing of the barbaric siege of Gaza, or the decades of ongoing theft, evictions, assaults on education, confiscation of land, demolition of homes, color coded permit system, arbitrary imprisonment, restriction of movement, checkpoints, extrajudicial executions, torture, and denials at every turn squeezing Palestinians into isolated ghettos.

    None of that seemingly matters.

    It does not matter that no one knows who murdered the Israeli teens. It seems the entire country is calling for Palestinian blood, reminiscent of American southern lynching rallies that went after black men whenever a white person turned up dead. Nor does it matter that these Israeli teens were settlers living in illegal Jewish-only colonies that were built on land stolen by the state mostly from Palestinian owners from the village of el-Khader. A huge portion of the settlers there are Americans, mostly from New York, like one of the murdered teens, who exercise Jewish privilege to hold dual citizenship; to have an extra country no matter where they’re from, one in their own homeland and one in ours, at the same time that the indigenous Palestinians fester in refugee camps, occupied ghettos, or boundless exile.

    Palestinian children are assaulted or murdered every day and barely do their lives register in western press. While Palestinian mothers are frequently blamed when Israel kills their children, accused of sending them to die or neglecting to keep them at home away from Israeli snipers, no one questions Rachel Frankel, the mother of one of the murdered settlers. She is not asked to comment on the fact that one of the missing settlers is a soldier who likely participated in the oppression of his Palestinian neighbors. No one asks why she would move her family from the United States to live in a segregated, supremacist colony established on land confiscated from the native non-Jewish owners. Certainly no one dares accuse her of therefore putting her children in harms way.

    No mother should have endure the murder of her child. No mother or father. That does not only apply to Jewish parents. The lives of our children are no less precious and their loss are no less shattering and spiritually unhinging. But there is a terrible disparity in the value of life here in the eyes of the state and the world, where Palestinian life is cheap and disposable, but Jewish life is sacrosanct.

    This exceptionalism and supremacy of Jewish life is a fundamental underpinning of the state of Israel. It pervades their every law and protocol, and is matched only by their apparent contempt and disregard for Palestinian life. Whether through laws that favor Jews for employment and educational opportunities, or laws that allow the exclusion of non-Jews from buying or renting among Jews, or endless military orders that limit the movement, water consumption, food access, education, marriage possibilities, and economic independence, or these periodic upending of Palestinian civil society, life for non-Jews ultimately conforms to the religious edict issued by Dov Lior, Chief Rabbi of Hebron and Kiryat Arba, saying “a thousand non-Jewish lives are not worth a Jew’s fingernail.”

    Israeli violence of the past few weeks is generally accepted and expected. And the terror we know they will unleash on our people will be, as it always is, cloaked in the legitimacy of uniforms and technological death machines. Israeli violence, no matter how vulgar, is inevitably couched as a heroic, ironic violence that western media frames as “response,” as if Palestinian resistance itself were not a response to Israeli oppression. When the ICRC was asked to issue a similar call for the immediate and unconditional release of the hundreds of Palestinian children held in Israeli jails (which is also in contravention of international humanitarian law), the ICRC refused, indicating there’s a difference between the isolated abduction of Israeli teens and the routine abduction, torture, isolation, and imprisonment of Palestinian children.

    When our children throw rocks at heavily armed Israeli tanks and jeeps rolling through our streets, we are contemptible parents who should be bear responsibility for the murder of our children if they are shot by Israeli soldiers or settlers. When we refuse to capitulate completely, we are “not partners for peace,” and deserve to have more land confiscated from us for the exclusive use of Jews. When we take up arms and fight back, kidnap a soldier, we are terrorists of the extreme kind who have no one to blame but ourselves as Israel subjects the entire Palestinian population to punitive collective punishment. When we engage in peaceful protests, we are rioters who deserve the live fire they send our way. When we debate, write, and boycott, we are anti-Semites who should be silenced, deported, marginalized, or prosecuted.

    What should we do, then? Palestine is quite literally being wiped off the map by a state that openly upholds Jewish supremacy and Jewish privilege. Our people continue to be robbed of home and heritage, pushed to the margins of humanity, blamed for our own miserable fate. We are a traumatized, principally unarmed, native society being destroyed and erased by one of the most powerful militaries in the world.

    Rachel Frankel went to the UN to plead for their support, saying “it is wrong to take children, innocent boys or girls, and use them as instruments of any struggle. It is cruel…I wish to ask: Doesn’t every child have the right to come home safely from school?” Do those sentiments apply to Palestinian children, too? Here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here are video examples of the abduction of Palestinian children from their homes at night and on their way to and from school.

    But none of that matters either. Does it? It matters that three Israeli Jews were killed. It doesn’t matter who did it or what the circumstances were, the entire Palestinian population will be made to suffer, more than they already are.

    Written FOR

    Some Deaths Really Matter: The Disproportionate Coverage of Israeli And Palestinian Killings

    July 03, 2014

    Israeli deaths matter much more than Palestinian deaths. This has long been a distinguishing feature of Western news media reporting on the Middle East. The recent blanket coverage afforded to the brutal killing of three Israeli teenagers highlights this immutable fact.

    Channel 4′s Alex Thomson offered a rare glimmer of dissent:

    Major broadcasters, such as BBC News, devoted headlines and extended reports to the deaths, and included heart-rending interviews with grieving relatives in Israel. The Guardian ran live coverage of the funerals for more than nine hours. But when has this ever happened for Palestinian victims of Israeli terror? A reader challenged the Guardian journalist leading the live coverage:

    Several nudges elicited the standard display of hand-washing:

    An extensive list of news stories and video reports appeared on the BBC website describing how Israel is ‘united in grief’, alongside stories titled, ‘Netanyahu: “Wide and deep chasm” between Israel and enemies’, ‘Thousands gather for Israeli teenagers’ funerals’, ‘Grief and anger after Israel teenager deaths’, and ‘On road where teens vanished’.

    These all strongly, and rightly, expressed the broadcaster’s empathy with the fact that something terrible had happened. But when has the BBC ever expressed this level of concern for the deaths of Palestinian teenagers? The question matters because consistent empathic bias has the effect of humanising Israelis for the public and dehumanising Palestinians. This is an extremely lethal form of media propaganda with real consequences for human suffering.

    A Guardian editorial noted that the killings ‘had shocked [Israel] to the core’. Western leaders had also expressed solidarity – an outpouring of concern that contrasted with the reaction to Palestinian deaths, which ‘so often pass with barely a murmur’. But that was all the Guardian editors had to say.

    The missing, ugly reality is that over the last 13 years, on average, one Palestinian child has been killed by Israel every 3 days. Since the outbreak of the second Intifada in September 2000, 1,523 Palestinian children have been killed by Israel’s occupation forces. Over the same time period, 129 Israeli children have been killed. Thus, the ratio of Palestinian children to Israeli children killed is more than ten to one. You would be forgiven for not having the slightest inkling of this from Western media coverage. Even in the past few days, in reporting the massive Israeli operation to find the teenagers, only the briefest of nods has been given to the ‘five Palestinians, including a number of minors, [who were] killed’ in the process.

    Following the tragic discovery of the bodies of the three Israeli teenagers, corporate journalism gave headline attention to President Obama’s condemnation of ‘this senseless act of terror against innocent youth’. Significant coverage was given to the shocked reaction of prime minister David Cameron who said:

    ‘This was an appalling and inexcusable act of terror perpetrated against young teenagers. Britain will stand with Israel as it seeks to bring to justice those responsible.’
    But when have Obama or Cameron ever condemned the killing of Palestinian youths or children by Israelis in this vehement way?

    We can easily see the contrast in media treatment of Israeli and Palestinian deaths by observing the lack of coverage, and the silence of Western leaders, about two young Palestinians, Nadim Nuwara, 17, and Muhammad Abu al-Thahir, 16, who were shot dead by Israeli security forces in May. The BBC did not entirely ignore the killings. But the deaths were presented as a murky event in which the truth was strongly disputed:

    ‘A human rights group has released a video it says shows two teenage Palestinians being shot dead by Israeli security forces at a protest last week.’ (Our emphasis.)
    The BBC report was quick to present the Israeli viewpoint upfront:

    ‘But the Israeli military said the video had been edited and did not document the “violent nature” of the incident.’It also questioned a claim that live ammunition had been fired at the boys.’
    A few days later, the Israeli military ordered the removal of the CCTV cameras that had captured the killings. The security cameras belonged to Fakher Sayed who ran a nearby carpentry shop. And the interest in this from BBC News and the rest of the corporate media? Zero, as far as we can tell.

    Every violent death is a tragedy. But the disproportionate coverage given to Israeli and Palestinian deaths is symptomatic of a deep-rooted, pro-Israel bias. Why is it so extreme? Because of the intense pressure brought to bear on the media by the powerful Israeli lobby, and by allied US-UK interests strongly favouring Israel. As one senior anonymous BBC editor once put it:

    ‘We wait in fear for the phone call from the Israelis.’


  19. #39
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    Roger Waters Compares Israel to Nazi Germany

    Pink Floyd vocalist says in interview that Israel's policy is similar to what went on in the 1930s in Germany.

    The former member of Pink Floyd, Roger Waters, was asked what he would tell artists who say that culture should not be boycotted and who choose to perform in Israel, to which he replied, “The situation in Israel/Palestine, with the occupation, the ethnic cleansing and the systematic racist apartheid Israeli regime is unacceptable.

    So for an artist to go and play in a country that occupies other people’s land and oppresses them the way Israel does, is plain wrong,” stated Waters. “They should say no. I would not have played for the Vichy government in occupied France in the Second World War, I would not have played in Berlin either during this time. Many people did, back in the day. There were many people that pretended that the oppression of the Jews was not going on. From 1933 until 1946. So this is not a new scenario. Except that this time it’s the Palestinian people being murdered.

    “Anybody who looks at the situation will see that if you choose not to take up arms to fight your oppressor, the non violent route, and the Boycott Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, which started in Palestine with 100% support from Palestinian civil society in 2004-2005, a movement that has now been joined by many people around the world, the global civil society, is a legitimate form of resistance to this brutal and oppressive regime,” he declared.

    “The voice, for instance, of the right wing rabbinate, which is so bizarre and hard to hear that you can hardly believe that it’s real,” said Waters. “They believe some very weird stuff you know, they believe that everybody that is not a Jew is only on earth to serve them and they believe that the Indigenous people of the region that they kicked off the land in 1948 and have continued to kick off the land ever since are sub-human.

    “The parallels with what went on in the 30’s in Germany are so crushingly obvious that it doesn’t surprise me that the movement that both you and I are involved in is growing every day,” he claimed. “The Russell Tribunal on Palestine was trying to shed light on this when we met, I only took part in two sessions, you took part in many more. It is an extremely obvious and fundamental problem of human rights which every thinking human being should apply himself to.”

    Waters also blasted what he called “the propaganda machine that starts in Israeli schools and that continues through all the Netanyahu’s bluster is poured all over the United States, not just Fox but also CNN and in fact in all the mainstream media.

    He went on to claim that Israel’s warnings against Iran’s nuclear weapons program are “a diversionary tactic,” and also claimed that “no Israeli government has been serious about creating a Palestinian state since 1948.”

    They’ve always had the Ben Gurion agenda of kicking all the Arabs out of the country and becoming greater Israel,” said Waters. “They tell a lie as part of their propaganda machinery whilst doing the other thing but they have been doing it so obviously in the last 10 years....This is so transparent that you’d have to have an IQ above room temperature not to understand what is going on. It is just dopey.”

  20. #40
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    More hypocrisy of Western Media

    'Israel under renewed Hamas attack', says the BBC. More balance is needed

    The macabre truth is that Israeli life is deemed by the western media to be worth more than a Palestinian life – this is the hierarchy of death at work

    9 July 2014

    "Israel under renewed Hamas attack": this was last night's BBC headline on the escalating bloodshed in Gaza. It is as perverse as Mike Tyson punching a toddler, followed by a headline claiming that the child spat at him. As Elizabeth Tsurkov, a Tel Aviv-based Israeli human rights activist, tweeted: "We are targeted by mostly shitty rockets. Gazans are being shelled with heavy bombs. We have shelters, sirens, Iron Dome. They have 0."

    There is no defence for Hamas firing rockets into civilian areas, and as sirens wail in Israel, the fear among ordinary Israelis should not be ignored or belittled. But the media coverage hardly reflects the reality: a military superpower armed with F-15 fighter jets, AH-64 Apache helicopters, Delilah missiles, IAI Heron-1 drones and Jericho II missiles (and nuclear bombs, for that matter), versus what David Cameron describes as a "prison camp" firing almost entirely ineffective missiles. Twenty-seven Palestinians are reported to have died in Gaza – and, mercifully, no Israelis have been killed by Hamas rockets – and yet the BBC opts for the Orwellian "Israel under renewed Hamas attack".

    The macabre truth is that Israeli life is deemed by the western media to be worth more than a Palestinian life: here is the "hierarchy of death" at work. According to the Israeli human rights organisation B'Tselem, 565 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli security forces since January 2009, while 28 Israeli civilians and 10 Israeli security personnel have been killed. The asymmetry of this so-called conflict is reflected in the death toll, but it is not reflected in the coverage.

    And so it goes for the events surrounding the abduction and vile murder of three Israeli teenagers. What was not widely reported by the western media was that – in the raids that followed their disappearance – six Palestinians, including a child, were killed by Israeli forces in the West Bank. As Amnesty International put it, these were "blatant violations of international humanitarian and human rights law".

    Perhaps our media will excuse themselves on the basis of motive: whoever killed the three teenagers intended to do so, while Israel only kills civilians unintentionally. Read, then, the report of Human Rights Watch, not an organisation that can be accused of being a den of lefties. Israel's actions "amounted to collective punishment", it declared, because of "unlawful use of force, arbitrary arrests, and illegal home demolitions". Human Rights Watch investigated two deaths and found "there was no evidence that the victim or anyone in the line of fire posed an imminent threat to Israeli soldiers or others". On 17 June, 20-year-old Ahmed Samada was shot dead in Jalazon refugee camp, and yet Israel did not even claim to have come under fire; the same for 17-year-old Sakher Abu Aal-Hasan, shot dead on 21 June.

    The BBC is a public broadcaster, duty-bound to provide balanced reports that accurately reflect the reality on the ground. It is failing to do so, and it is up to licence payers – to whom it is accountable – to demand that it does.


    ABC News tells viewers that scenes of destruction in Gaza are in Israel

    More than fifty Palestinians have been killed and another 450 wounded since Monday in Israel’s ongoing assault on the besieged Gaza Strip, dubbed “Operation Protective Edge” by the Israeli army.

    As usual, mainstream media outlets are straining to paint Israel as the victim, defending its people against irrational Palestinian rocket fire.

    There is no equating the killing and maiming of dozens of innocent Palestinians with scared Israelis seeking shelter from crude rockets that rarely cause damage. But that hasn’t stopped media outlets from trying, and in some cases, outright lying, to distort the violence.

    In one stark example, ABC News’ Diane Sawyer misidentifies scenes of the aftermath of Israeli missile strikes in Gaza as destruction caused by Palestinian rocket fire.

    As Sawyer segues into the segment, she says, “We take you overseas now to the rockets raining down on Israel today as Israel tried to shoot them out of the sky.” Next to her is video footage not of Israelis or even Israel, but of Israeli airstrikes on Gaza.

    Sawyer then incorrectly describes an image of a Palestinian family gathering belongings in the smoking debris of a missile-hit home in Gaza as “an Israeli family trying to salvage what they can.”

    Sawyer then describes an image of a Palestinian woman surrounded by destroyed homes as “one woman standing speechless among the ruins,” with the implication that she is Israeli.

    Sawyer’s bald misreporting reflects either a deliberate lie by ABC News or willful ignorance so severe that Palestinian death and misery is invisible even when it’s staring ABC producers right in the face.


    Outrage turns to satire after ABC News misidentifies Palestinian victims

    More at: http://stream.aljazeera.com/story/201407101217-0023919

    I filmed the LAPD assaulting me at pro-Israel demo



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts