Monday, April 4, 2011

Revisiting Israel’s Terror War on Gaza

Stephen Lendman

Despite no legitimate provocation, Israel began terror bombing Gaza on December 27, 2008. Invasion followed, attacking innocent civilian men, women and children for over three weeks, using missiles, bombs, shells, and illegal weapons against defenseless people. Mass slaughter and destruction ensued.

Brazen crimes of war and against humanity were committed. No culpable officials were held responsible. Security Council no-fly zone protection wasn’t ordered. International community leaders approved or were silent. Washington was complicit by supplying Israel with weapons, munitions, and encouragement. Obama acts the same as Bush, waging a quartet of lawless wars and using proxies in others.
Operation Cast Lead remains one of history’s greatest crimes. Yet Israel was green-lighted to wage it with impunity, what it’s done numerous times in its history, besides terrorizing Palestinians by:

– illegal military occupation;
– collective punishment and intimidation;
– air and ground attacks;
– isolating Gaza illegally under siege;
– intermittently bombing and shooting its residents, including noncombatant farmers, fishermen and children;

– regular residential neighborhood incursions;
– bulldozing homes;
– dispossessing residents;
– land seizures;
– arbitrary arrests;
– torture as official policy, including against women and children;
– targeted assassinations;
– denying refugees their right of return;
– movement and free expression restrictions;
– violence, not peaceful coexistence;
– confrontation, not diplomacy;
– war, not peace; and
– denying Palestinian sovereignty, as well as equal justice, human rights and civil liberty protections.

Israel is a rogue terror state, a democracy in name only affording rights solely to Jews. Remember Cast Lead, one of history’s greatest crimes. Justice Richard Goldstone documented them convincingly in his 575 page report titled, “Human Rights in Palestine and Other Occupied Arab Territories: Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict.”
It covered Operation Cast Lead, the Gaza siege, the impact of Israel’s West Bank military occupation, and much more, including:

– events between the “ceasefire” period from June 18, 2008 to Israel’s initiated hostilities on December 27, 2008;

– applicable international law;
– Occupied Gaza under siege;
– an overview of Cast Lead;
– obligations of both sides to protect civilians;
– indiscriminate Israeli attacks on civilians, causing many hundreds of deaths and thousands of injuries;

– “the use of certain weapons;”
– attacking “the foundations of civilian life in Gaza: destruction of industrial infrastructure, food production, water installations, sewage treatment plants and housing;”

– using Palestinians as human shields;
– detention and incarceration of Gazans during the conflict;
– the IDF’s objectives and strategy;
– impact of the siege and military operations on Gazans and their human rights;
– the detention of the Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit;
– internal Gaza violence – Hamas v. Fatah;
– the Occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem;
– Israel’s treatment of Palestinians in the West Bank, including excessive or lethal force during demonstrations;

– Palestinians in Israeli prisons;
– Israeli violations of free movement and access rights;
– Fatah targeting Hamas supporters in the West Bank, and restricting free assembly and expression;
– rocket and mortar attacks against Israeli civilians;
– repression of dissent, access to information, and treatment of human rights defenders in Israel;
– Israeli responses to war crimes charges;
– proceedings by Palestinian authorities;
– universal jurisdiction;
– reparations; and
– conclusions and recommendations.

It collected enough information “of a credible and reliable nature….to make a finding in fact.” It established clear evidence of crimes, determining they were deliberate or reckless. An accompanying press release said:

“(T)here is evidence indicating serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law were committed by Israel during the Gaza conflict, and that Israel committed actions amounting to war crimes, and possibly crimes against humanity.”

It explained that Israel falsely used the pretext of rocket attacks to attack “the people of Gaza as a whole” illegally.

A detailed discussion of Goldstone’s findings can be accessed through the following link:
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2009/09/goldstone-commission-gaza-conflict.html
Palestinian Centre for Human Rights Report Remembers Cast Lead

In its December 2010 report titled, “The Illegal Closure of the Gaza Strip: Collective Punishment of the Civilian Population,” the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR) remembered Cast Lead, saying it exacerbated isolation:

– killing over 1,400 Gazans, mostly civilians;
– injuring thousands more, many seriously; and
– causing “extensive destruction of houses and civilian infrastructure, including schools, hospitals, and industry.”

Moreover, Israel violated Security Council Resolution 1860 (January 8, 2009), calling for “full withdrawal of Israeli forces,” as well as “unimpeded humanitarian assistance” for Gazan victims. As a result, deepening crisis ensued.

On April 1, Richard Goldstone’s Washington Post op-ed headlined, “Reconsidering the Goldstone Report on Israel and war crimes,” saying:

“Our report found evidence potential war crimes and possibly crimes against humanity by both Israel and Hamas.” The latter ones, in fact, were minor by comparison, responding only to Israeli provocations.

Israel’s, however, “were based on the deaths of and injuries to civilians in situations where….evidence (pointed to no) other reasonable conclusion.”

Goldstone, however, softened his initial condemnation by commending Israel’s Cast Lead inquiry, ignoring how all its internal investigations whitewash crimes of war and against humanity – most recently the Gaza and May 2010 Freedom Flotilla massacres.

According to PCHR:

“Rather than uphold the rule of law, the Israeli investigative and judicial system is artfully manipulated to provide an illusion of investigative and judicial rigour, while systematically perpetuating pervasive impunity” for crimes too extreme to ignore.

Whitewash Examples

On April 29, 2009, IDF Chief of Staff, General Gabi Ashkenazi authorized publication of the findings of five military investigate teams. Unsurprisingly, they concluded that:

“(T)throughout the fighting in Gaza, the IDF operated in accordance with international law. The IDF maintained a high professional and moral level while facing an enemy that aimed to terrorize Israeli civilians whilst taking cover amidst uninvolved civilians in the the Gaza strip and using them as human shields.”

It continued at some length justifying brazen Israeli crimes of war and against humanity. In contrast, a year after hostilities ended, Human Rights Watch called Israeli attacks “indiscriminate, disproportionate (and) at times seemingly deliberate, in violation of the laws of war,” condemning IDF investigations as no “substitute for impartial and thorough investigations into laws-of-war violations” they whitewashed.

In his April 1 op-ed, Goldstone failed to explain and denounce them. Instead, he defended the indefensible.

Netanyahu’s (Jacob) Turkel commission investigation of Israel’s Freedom Flotilla massacre also produced lies, distortions, omissions, false conclusions, and exoneration of cold-blooded murder, ordered by top government and military officials who got off scot-free like Cast Lead criminals.

Specifically, it concluded that Israel’s (illegal siege) does not break international law….(and) there were clear indications that the flotilla intended to break the naval blockade….By clearly resisting capture, the Mavi Marmara had become a military objective,” despite on board activists having no weapons and offering no resistance. Saying so was a lie.

In contrast, an independent UN Human Rights Council investigation “concluded that a series of violations of international law, including international humanitarian and human rights law, were committed by the Israeli forces during the interception of the flotilla and during the detention of passengers in Israel prior to deportation.”

It added that Israel’s attack:

“was unnecessary, disproportionate, excessive and inappropriate and resulted in the wholly avoidable killing and maiming of a large number of civilian passengers.”

Also that at least six of the dead were killed by “extra-legal, arbitrary and summary executions,” some shot multiple times in the head at close range.

Moreover, similar tactics were used before, during, and after Cast Lead, facts Richard Goldstone knows and should have explained instead of suggesting civilians may not have been “intentionally targeted as a matter of policy.”

Indeed they always are under Israel’s “Dahiya Doctrine,” targeting civilians as official policy. Named after the Beirut suburb IDF attacks destroyed in the 2006 Lebanon war, it’s how all Israeli wars are waged. IDF Northern Commander Gabi Eisenkot explained, saying:

“What happened in the Dahiya quarter of Beirut in 2006 will happen in every village from which Israel is fired on. We will apply disproportionate force at the heart of the enemy’s weak spot (civilians) and cause great damage and destruction. From our standpoint, these are not civilian villages (towns or cities), they are military bases. This is not a recommendation. This is a plan. And it has been approved.”

It also prioritizes damaging or destroying assets, economic interests, and centers of civilian power, requiring long-term reconstruction even though international law prohibits attacking civilians and non-military related targets. Israel spurned international law in Cast Lead, against humanitarian Flotilla activists, and in all its belligerent confrontations.

Instead of condemning this policy, Goldstone softened his criticism, contradicting his detailed findings, replicated by other reputable human rights studies, unequivocally accusing Israel of crimes of war and against humanity.

A Final Comment

On March 25, the UN Human Rights Council adopted a resolution, urging the General Assembly address Israel’s Cast Lead impunity by asking the Security Council to request investigation, action and resolution by the International Criminal Criminal Court (ICC).

For over two years, justice for thousands of Palestinian victims has been denied. Gaza remains illegally under siege. Meaningful action is demanded. Crimes this great can’t be tolerated.
Under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, the Security Council can request ICC action. Washington’s veto, of course, looms. Nonetheless, it’s high time other members demanded, shamed, and did whatever it takes to assure long-suffering Palestinians justice. Then do it for other victims of injustice instead of authorizing war on Libya when it should have acted resolutely to prevent it.

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

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

Is Israel preparing a new war on Gaza?

Eric Ruder

4cmimg_531-a.jpg

Eric Ruder reports on Israel's new attacks on Gaza--and the threat of worse.

SocialistWorker, April 4, 2011

HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE marched in Gaza in a funeral procession for three Hamas members killed by Israeli air strikes while driving in a car near Khan Younis on April 1. Ten days earlier on March 22, Israeli air strikes and shelling killed four members of Islamic Jihad east of Gaza City and four civilians--including three youth aged 12, 16 and 17--in two separate attacks. The day before that, 19 Palestinians were wounded in air strikes throughout Gaza.

These are some of the casualties in a sharp escalation in Israel's pounding of the people of residents--with the threat of worse to come.

The stepped-up assault is a reflection of the growing sense among Israel's political leadership that dramatic steps are needed to counter the country's increasing isolation in a Middle East roiled by a mass democratic upsurge against U.S.-backed dictators and Israeli allies.

That spirit of popular rebellion has also swept up Palestinian youth and was the impetus behind a March 15 mobilization that crossed the territorial partition of Palestinians--hundreds mobilized in Ramallah, Nablus, Hebron and Bethlehem in the West Bank and thousands gathered in Gaza City. The youth took to the streets to demand unity between Hamas and Fatah in the face of Israel's ongoing belligerence.

According to an account posted on ElectronicIntifada.net:

Twitter was ablaze, Facebook groups sprouted like mushrooms, and bloggers typed on overdrive, both from within the occupied Palestinian territories and abroad. These were the weeks and days leading up to the popular demonstrations of March 15, organized by a coalition of Palestinian youth groups across the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, inspired by Arab popular uprisings and infected by the highly contagious freedom/revolution bug sweeping the region.

The goal: a mass mobilization of Palestinians to pressure the Hamas-run government in Gaza, and the Fatah-led Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, to end the four-year-long division.

The largest demonstration was in Gaza City, where many thousands attended, according to a Hamas spokesperson, while in Ramallah, Palestinian youth set up tents the night before the protest, and some participated in hunger strikes.

The following day, Fatah leader and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas proposed that he visit Gaza in the interest of dialogue, but neither Fatah nor Hamas view the unity impulse with enthusiasm. Instead, each side hopes to use the call for unity to pursue their respective agendas while simultaneously repressing the protests they hope to channel for their own purposes, according to Israeli journalist Amira Hass.

Fatah has been damaged by the leaking of the Palestine Papers, which document in graphic detail what was already known: that the leadership of the PA had shamefully agreed to historic concessions to Israel while receiving almost nothing in return.

So the PA leadership hoped that "unity protests," which it leadership quietly sanctioned, could be used to deflect blame for the sorry state of affairs onto the imagined "stubbornness" of Hamas to work in a collaborative way with Fatah and the PA--despite the fact that it was Fatah and the PA, in collaboration with Israel, that seized power in 2007 coup after Hamas won elections the year before.

In addition, the PA has called for municipal elections in July and legislative and presidential elections in September, but Hamas sees this as a bid to sanction by electoral means the PA's grip on power. Hamas also doesn't want to be drawn into what it considers intolerable compromises with Israel on security matters.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

IN THE short run, therefore, prospects for overcoming the political rift that has divided the Palestinian people look dim--which is exactly what the Israeli government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wants.

"You can't have peace with both Israel and Hamas," Netanyahu warned Abbas on March 28. "Choose peace with Israel."

Netanyahu was responding to Abbas' statement that the PA would be willing to forego $470 million in annual direct financial assistance it receives from the U.S. in order to pursue unity with Hamas. "Of course we need the American money," said Azzam Ahmed, one of Abbas' advisers. "But if they use it as a way of pressuring us, we are ready to relinquish that aid."

Whether the PA truly is willing to give up such a vast sum of money remains to be seen, but it's further proof that the PA feels compelled to respond to the growing clamor from below for unity in the face of Israeli repression--and the regional revolt that makes the PA a target because of its past and present collaboration with the Netanyahu government.

But the Arab uprising has also alarmed Israel's political establishment. Israel's siege of Gaza would have been impossible without the collaboration of Egyptian dictator and U.S. ally Hosni Mubarak. And the revolt shaking Syria's dictatorial regime, long considered an Israeli foe, carries with it a great deal of uncertainty about what might replace it.

Israel is thus using its campaign of terror bombing of Gaza to heighten the strategic and tactical differences among the various Palestinian factions in an effort to forestall any possibility of unity as well as to signal its willingness to rain down more violence on Palestinians.

The mainstream media, especially in the U.S., has cooperated in the effort to portray Israel's assault on Gaza as a matter of self-defense, despite its obviously offensive nature.

Case in point: The bomb detonated at a Jerusalem bus stop on March 23 that killed one and injured 30 more was reported in headline news around the world, but the Israeli shelling that killed four civilians a day earlier received hardly any coverage. Apparently, the death of Palestinian civilians in Gaza doesn't compare to the deaths of civilians inside Israel.

Likewise, the press has devoted acres of coverage to the firing of Qassem rockets from Gaza for the first time in years. The Palestinian rockets generally fall without effect in the desert, but are fired by Palestinian factions into southern Israel as a form of symbolic protest at Israel's violence. Yet Israel's use of far more powerful artillery and air strikes are described as "defensive."

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

THE GROWING sense of isolation within the Israeli establishment goes beyond its concerns about the regional Arab revolt and growing pressures for Palestinian unity. On the international plane, Israel is also facing mounting challenges.

First, there is the possibility that though post-Mubarak Egypt hasn't yet opened up the Rafah border crossing, this may happen. According to Gaza activist Haidar Eid:

Now the question that begs for an answer is about the future of the Egyptian-Palestinian relationship. The Rafah Crossing is "partially" open for a few passengers, but no goods, food or medicine are allowed. Some Palestinians are turned back every day, and the decision taken by the previous government not to grant Gazans entry via Cairo airport is still in force.

But the opening of the Rafah border would substantially change the situation confronting Israel.

Second, an international flotilla made up of some 20 vessels carrying hundreds of activists from two dozen countries is set to sail in late May in an attempt to break the siege of Gaza. The timing of the flotilla will coincide with last year's May 31 assault on another Gaza-bound flotilla, in which Israeli commandos killed nine human rights activists.

Israeli officials are concerned about the attention that such convoys bring to their siege of Gaza, and they have already begun a campaign to demonize the effort to bring humanitarian aid to Gaza's residents.

On April 1, Netanyahu appealed to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon to "prove" the UN's commitment to human rights and international law by stopping the flotilla, which he described as a conglomerate of "extreme Islamists that are interested only in provocation."

Netanyahu's tirade against the flotilla is laughable. "We are appalled by this flagrant misrepresentation," reads a statement from U.S. Boat to Gaza, the coalition of activists that is organizing an American vessel for the international flotilla. "The organizers and passengers of the U.S. boat--a committed, nonviolent, human rights mission sailing as part of the international flotilla--are people from all walks of life, among them lawyers, social workers, artists, firefighters, midwives, writers, doctors, filmmakers, retired U.S. army personnel, veterans, women's rights organizers, teachers and nurses."

Rami Abdo, a spokesperson for the European Campaign to End the Siege of Gaza, pointed out Netanyahu's hypocrisy:

We call on the United Nations to remember its purpose as stated in its own charter: to suppress acts of aggression, and to settle disputes in conformity with principles of justice and international law...There is nothing in international law that supports Israel's four-year-long blockade of Gaza, or its past use of violence to stop the delivery of humanitarian shipments. In fact, if the UN intercedes at all, in should be on behalf of the unarmed flotilla, which seeks only to allow the traffic of people and goods in and out of Gaza that is necessary for the economic survival of the 1.6 million residents.

The third challenge facing Israel on an international scale is the growing campaign for boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS). Around the world, more and more activists, students, intellectuals and artists are refusing to be complicit with Israel's occupation and apartheid regime. This means boycotting Israeli goods, severing ties with Israeli academic and cultural institutions, and putting pressure on corporations and other financial institutions with investments in Israel.

As Pink Floyd's Roger Water wrote on March 11 about his endorsement of the BDS movement, referring to his song "Another Brick in the Wall:"

In 1980, a song I wrote, "Another Brick in the Wall Part 2," was banned by the government of South Africa because it was being used by black South African children to advocate their right to equal education. That apartheid government imposed a cultural blockade, so to speak, on certain songs, including mine...

Artists were right to refuse to play in South Africa's Sun City resort until apartheid fell and white people and Black people enjoyed equal rights. And we are right to refuse to play in Israel until the day comes--and it surely will come--when the wall of occupation falls and Palestinians live alongside Israelis in the peace, freedom, justice and dignity that they all deserve.



:: Article nr. 76527 sent on 04-apr-2011 18:47 ECT
www.uruknet.info?p=76527

Israel okays 942 new settler homes in East Jerusalem

By Marius Schattner

JERUSALEM (AFP) -- Jerusalem city council on Monday approved the construction of 942 new Jewish-only homes in Gilo settlement in occupied East Jersualem, a councillor told AFP.

Elisha Peleg, from the right-wing Likud party, confirmed that the new construction in Gilo, close to the West Bank city of Bethlehem, had been approved during an afternoon session of the district planning council.

"Of course we approved it, it is only the first step," he told AFP, saying it was approved by five in favor and one against.

The municipality said this project was in addition to an earlier tranche of more than 900 new homes in Gilo approved in November 2009, which brought sharp condemnation from Washington which expressed "dismay" over the move.

The latest decision came a day ahead of a top-level meeting at the White House between Israeli President Shimon Peres and US President Barack Obama.

Gilo lies in occupied East Jerusalem, which Israel captured along with the West Bank from Jordan in the 1967 Six Day War and later annexed in a move not recognized by the international community.

Israel considers both halves of the Holy City its "eternal, indivisible" capital, and does not view construction in the east to be settlement activity.

The Palestinians, however, want East Jerusalem as the capital of their future state and fiercely contest any actions to extend Israel's control over the sector.

The Palestinians condemned the move and said they would appeal to the international community to pressure Israel to respect international law.

"We strongly condemn the decision of the Jerusalem municipality to build 942 new homes in Gilo," said chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erakat. "This decision proves once again that Israel has chosen settlements over peace."

Some 180,000 Israelis live in East Jerusalem alongside nearly 270,000 Palestinians.

On Friday Israeli settlement watchdog Peace Now said that an Israeli landowner was seeking to sell plots for 30 homes in another mainly Palestinian neighborhood of Jerusalem, where 117 settler families already live.

The international community has repeatedly called on Israel to avoid new building projects in East Jerusalem.

US-brokered peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians are deadlocked over the issue of Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank and east Jerusalem.

The Palestinians walked out of direct peace talks three weeks after they started last September when Israel refused to extend a 10-month partial freeze on settlement construction in the West Bank.

They refuse to negotiate with Israel while it builds on land which would be a Palestinian state in a peace agreement.

In March 2010, the interior ministry announced a plan to build 1,600 Jewish-only homes in Ramat Shlomo in East Jerusalem.

The announcement, which came as US Vice President Joe Biden was visiting Israel, provoked fierce American opposition and soured relations with Washington for several months.

http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=375585

Sunday, April 3, 2011

Israel to promote itself on Facebook


Deputy foreign minister meets networking site's managers to discuss plans for online PR

Yitzhak Benhorin

WASHINGTON – The government intends to turn the social network Facebook into the main platform for Israeli online public relations, investing a lot of resources on creating an efficient strategy to utilize the 600 million-large' network.

Deputy Foreign Minister Daniel Ayalon visited the California offices of the network on Friday, and met with company heads including Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg and VP of Advertising and Global Operations David Fischer, who is the son of Bank of Israel Governor Stanley Fischer.

The Foreign Ministry is set on turning the famous social network into the main platform for Israeli online public relations both in English and in Arabic. Officials in Jerusalem have expressed their belief that Facebook is a friendly platform for communication with young people around the world, allowing for distribution of messages through video clips and games.

Israeli embassies around the world have already begun to manage Facebook pages, but now the Foreign Ministry intends to make more efficient use of the network to improve Israel's image.

Ayalon's meetings are intended to foster a relationship between the Israeli government and Facebook heads. Ayalon has also invited Facebook managers to visit Israel in order to meet with internet entrepreneurs and participate in the Presidential Conference expected to take place in Jerusalem next June.

The deputy foreign minister displayed before them Israel's high-tech abilities, noting that Intel Company is the biggest private employer in Israel, with more than 7,000 employees.

Following Facebook's slow response in closing the internet page calling for a "third Intifada" and a violent protest against Israel, Facebook managers clarified that in the future they intend to deactivate any pages preaching violence. They also stated Facebook plans to open a marketing center in Israel.

Face to face with Israel's critics

The United States' government is already cooperating with major internet companies such as Google, Facebook and Twitter to develop media tools intended to reach citizens around the world, especially in developing communities. Young Egyptians, for example, were part of a program advertised by the State Department online. These youths later organized protests in their country via Facebook.

Ayalon met with California Governor Jerry Brown and told him that due to a travel warning issued by California to Israel there are currently no student exchanges between Israeli and Californian universities.

Ayalon mentioned that these programs, with leading universities such as Stanford and Berkley, are a crucial tool for acknowledging and learning about Israel's reality. Brown responded that he will act to cancel the orders.

As he left the meeting Ayalon ran into an anti-Israel protest, experiencing first-hand the great objection against Israel and its policies. He approached demonstrators, who were holding posters demanding the US government stop funding Israel "because of the occupation", and attempted to speak with them.

This rare dialogue caught the attention of those passing by, some of whom expressed their support of Ayalon.

Ronen Medzini contributed to this report

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4051066,00.html

Saturday, April 2, 2011

South African university cuts ties with Israel's Ben-Gurion amid calls for academic boycott

By JENNY GROSS , Associated Press

JOHANNESBURG - A leading South African university is severing ties with Israel's Ben-Gurion University, acting on calls from hundreds of South African academics and intellectuals for an academic boycott.

It's a "landmark moment," the powerful Congress of South African Trade Unions said Thursday, praising the University of Johannesburg for being first to sever such ties in a growing campaign to isolate Israel for its attacks on Palestinians in Gaza.

The University of Johannesburg will end the 25-year relationship on April 1, but professors can continue to work individually with Ben-Gurion, Vice Chancellor Adam Habib said.

More than 400 South Africans signed a petition calling for the boycott, including Nobel Peace Prize laureate Archbishop Desmond Tutu. The campaign has resonance coming from a country where activists encouraged international boycotts and sanctions to help end the legalized race discrimination that was apartheid.

Habib said the university's senate committee discussed the issue for two hours on Wednesday then had a secret vote. Sixty percent voted to sever ties, outvoting the remainder who wanted relations with both Israeli and Palestinian universities.

"This is not a boycott of Ben-Gurion," said UJ's executive director for advancement, Kerry Swift. "The formal relationship between the institutions is in a sense an obstacle, and the feeling is that we would encourage relationships on an individual basis."

In Israel, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev said it regretted the decision.

"The only losers in this decision are the people of South Africa," Ben-Gurion president Rivka Carmi said.

Student association leader Uri Keidar wrote a letter to the South African university saying, "I find it difficult to believe that BGU, the home of 20,000 freethinking students of different religious and ethnic backgrounds, is under this brutal attack."

Alana Baranov of South Africa's Board of Jewish Deputies said South Africans "should be serving to provide a tolerant and respectful place where complex problems can be resolved and we can share resources.

"Academic boycotts are anti-freedom of speech and anti-academic," she said.

Baranov said the joint research had been done to improve the lives of average South Africans.

The two universities had joint research projects and academic exchanges on biotechnology and water purification, Habib said.

Those fighting to end cooperation have argued that Ben-Gurion has ties to the Israeli Defense Force and is complicit in their oppression of Palestinians.

"Israeli universities are an intimate part of the Israeli regime, by active choice," Tutu wrote in a recent essay. "While Palestinians are not able to access universities and schools, Israeli universities produce the research, technology, arguments and leaders for maintaining the occupation."

Cooperation between Ben-Gurion University and the former Rand Afrikaans University, which was a whites-only university under South Africa's apartheid system, began in 1987. The University of Johannesburg, created in 2005, took over various campuses including Rand Afrikaans as part of efforts to give all South Africans access to higher education.

Israel officially opposed apartheid, but its ties with South Africa's former white government were seen as close. The late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat was among the guests at Nelson Mandela's 1994 inauguration as South Africa's first democratically elected president.

The post-apartheid government is a sharp critic of Israel's Palestinian policies.

South Africa has an influential Jewish population, including many who were involved in the anti-apartheid movement. Helen Suzman won international acclaim for being one of the few white lawmakers to fight against government repression of blacks and the imprisonment of Nelson Mandela. Anti-apartheid activist Harry Schwarz, South Africa's ambassador to the U.S. during the country's transition from apartheid, played a key role in the country's transition to democracy.

http://www.startribune.com/world/118570644.html

5.8 million Israelis Get 100 Billion In US Tax Dollars While American States Are Falling Apart

israel is a vampire sucking the life out of America.


Friday, April 1, 2011

46% of Israeli teens: Revoke Arabs' rights











Friedrich Ebert Foundation's Youth Study reveals Israel's teens think greatest threat to state is Jewish-Arab conflict, believe less in democratic values. As for who they trust most - IDF gets 93%

Tomer Velmer

A new study examining Jewish and Arab Israeli teens' opinions on a wide range of issues shows nearly half of Jewish youths support revoking Arab-Israelis' basic rights.

The study focused on such issues as nationalism, democracy and attitudes towards State institutions.

The results: Israeli teens in 2010 believe less in democracy, are inclined towards rebelliousness and violence, are more racist and some have given up hope for peace. They are also more right-wing and patriotic.

The third Youth Study (previous studies were held in 1998 and 2004) conducted by the Friedrich Ebert Foundation in cooperation with the Macro Center for Political Economics examined Israeli teen and youth trends over the past 12 years.

In total, 1,600 teens from two age groups – 15-18 and 21-24 were interviewed.

Each age group included 600 Jewish and 200 Arab interviewees. The study's conclusions, presented by the Dachaf Public Opinion Research Institute directed by Dr. Mina Tzemach, are available in a book which will be published Thursday.

According to the data, the importance of democracy as a national goal among Israeli teens has dropped from second place in 1998 (26%) to third place in 2010 with just 14.3%. Meanwhile, the importance of "Jewishness" as a national goal has climbed from third place (18.1% in 1998) to first place in 2010 with 26%.

About 60% of Jewish youths prefer "strong leadership" to rule of law and the study reveals that 46% of those asked tended to negate the basic political rights like the right to be elected from Israel's Arab citizens.

Asked how they feel when they think of Arabs, 25% responded with "hate" and 12% responded with "fear".

Biggest threat

When it comes to State institutions, the IDF received Israeli teens' virtual complete trust (93%). Surprisingly, the survey shows that more teens trusted politicians in 2010 – from 38% in 1998 to 43% in 2010.

Analysis of the data shows that a majority of Israel's youth (42%) believe that the Jewish-Arab conflict is the biggest threat to the State of Israel, compared with 23% that claimed that the schism between religious and secular Jews is the most dangerous.

In 1998, the findings were quite different as 44% saw the religious-secular rift as the biggest threat, while only 27% believed that the Jewish-Arab conflict was the most menacing. Researchers believe this shows a process of radicalization within Israeli society.

"It is possible that the combination of years of intifada and its effect on Jews, together with the October 2000 riots and their effect on Arabs, and the increase in nationalistic rhetoric in the political arena over the past few years are behind the perception that this issue is the most threatening to both communities," the researchers noted.

"There is no doubt that there is a direct tie between this perception and the drop in support for democratic values and equal rights for Arabs."

Analysis also revealed that the increase in feelings of fear and aversion towards Arabs manifests in political identity. Thus, 13 years ago only 48% of those interviewed defined themselves as right-wing whereas in 2010 the result was 62%.

While in 1998, 32% of the teens defined themselves as left-wing, in 2010 only 12% considered themselves as such.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/1,7340,L-4050228,00.html