Australia

December 5, 2010December 11, 2020

Ned Kelly’s Jerilderie Letter & Julian Assange

A hunt is on for journalist and popular free speech advocate Julian Assange which according to his lawyer has “political motivations”,. “I’m really rather worried by the political motivations that appear to be behind this,” says Mark Stephens, Julian’s counsel.

On the run in February, 1879, Ned Kelly had no advocate, instead dictating to his comrade Joe Byrne the circumstances which led him to become a fugitive of the law. The marvellous Jerilderie letter, sometimes known as Kelly’s manifesto, was intended to be published as a pamphlet.

Some of my favourite quotations from Ned Kelly’s letter are below, testimony of a colonial ‘lesser being’ to the empire which abrogates his rights and freedoms through its craven corrupt employees, with relevance to Julian Assange’s current situation confronting the superpower whose specious narrative and actions are challenged by the release of diplomatic cables supplied to Wikileaks by a whistleblower, and its shameful sycophant, Australia, his country of birth, whose leader has betrayed him and all of its citizens with bad legal advice and sacrifice of citizens rights to the hegemon.

‘It will pay Government to give those people who are suffering innocence, justice and liberty. if not I will be compelled to show some colonial stratagem which will open the eyes of not only the Victoria Police and inhabitants but also the whole British army and now doubt they will acknowledge their hounds were barking at the wrong stump.’

‘yet remember there is not one drop of murderous blood in my Veins’

‘yet in every paper that is printed I am called the blackest and coldest blooded murderer ever on record’

‘yet they know and acknowledge I have been wronged and my mother and four or five men lagged innocent and is my brothers and sisters and my mother not to be pitied also who has no alternative only to put up with the brutal and cowardly conduct of a parcel of big ugly fat-necked wombat headed big bellied magpie legged narrow hipped splaw-footed sons of Irish Bailiffs or english landlords which is better known as Officers of Justice or Victorian Police who some calls honest gentlemen but I would like to know what business an honest man would have in the Police as it is an old saying It takes a rogue to catch a rogue and a man that knows nothing about roguery would never enter the force an take an oath to arrest brother sister father or mother if required and to have a case and conviction if possible Any man knows it is possible to swear a lie and if a policeman looses a conviction for the sake of swearing a lie he has broke his oath therefore he is a perjurer either ways.’

‘What would England do if America declared war and hoisted a green flag as its all Irishmen that has got command of her armies forts and batteries even her very life guards and beef tasters are Irish would they not slew around and fight her with their own arms for the sake of the colour they dare not wear for years. and to reinstate it and rise old Erins isle once more, from the pressure and tyrannism of the English yoke, which has kept it in poverty and starvation, and caused them to wear the enemys coats. What else can England expect. Is there not big fat-necked Unicorns enough paid to torment and drive me to do thing which I dont wish to do, without the public assisting them I have never interefered with any person unless they deserved it, and yet there are civilians who take firearms against me, for what rea-son I do not know, unless they want me to turn on them and extermin-ate them without medicine.’

From the torrent of support and journalistic output about Wikileaks and the issues underlying the leaked cables, this exceptional article by Nikki Usher captures the arguments for the essential role of a free media in facilitating government openness and accountability for all .

‘The truth is, though, that everyone here is a winner — traditional media and non-traditional journalism and, most importantly, the public.
…
Imagine this: Look at what happens when mainstream news and whatever we want to call WikiLeaks work together. The forces are not in opposition but are united with a common goal — again, informing the public — and the result is that mainstream news can do what it does best thanks to the help of the information WikiLeaks provides. (But, of course, it couldn’t do it without WikiLeaks.) This is a moment of glory for all those who talk about crowdsourcing, user-generated content, and the like. Perhaps this is the ultimate form of users helping to create and shape the news. And the result is a better-informed public.’

Here on our ABC, the intercourse between Clinton and Rudd is subject for debate, contempt and many less than useful explanations.

According to the document, Ms Clinton expressed concern about China’s economic rise and asked Mr Rudd: “How do you deal toughly with your banker?”

Mr Rudd responded by saying that China needed to be integrated into the international community, but that countries should be prepared to deploy force if everything goes wrong.

In contrast to the ALP’s niggardly “un-Australian” and exceedingly unpopular betrayal of Assange, Abbott’s taciturnity and Bishop’s abbreviated nod to the citizenry, Bob Brown has maintained a steady, clear voice.

“Australian citizenships should be respected and he should be reassured that his citizenship is safe,” Senator Brown said.

“Mr Assange has come across a great ream of documents which throw some light on US foreign policy. It is important that we know what drives governments to make decisions.”

“Mr Assange has had no criminal conviction and there is a lot of political conjecture and juggling of claims against him.”

“If this material had gone straight to one of the Australian newspapers they would have published it. The press works off leaks like this all the time.”

“I understand that WikiLeaks goes through a process before releasing any documents to help ensure that such releases do not put lives in danger,” Senator Brown said. “I urge WikiLeaks to be diligent in that.”

Recording of Bob Brown’s interview on ABC Radio 774 here.

Lawyer, Stephen Keim, says threats to WikiLeaks ‘damages Australia

Australian Lawyers for Human Rights president Stephen Keim says accusations of criminal law breaches levelled at Assange undermine free speech principles.

“Although the Attorney-General is entitled to disagree with – even protest – the actions taken, it is a particularly objectionable misuse of political hyperbole in these circumstances to make sweeping allegations of illegality,” Mr Keim said.

Downer rushes to the rescue of the political ruling class, perhaps hoping the same courtesy will be extended to him if a cable should materialise with his name on it. Downer feels “sorry for Kevin Rudd in this situation.” Kevin, though is relaxed and cheerful in comparison to his incensed US counterparts, who vow to change the law especially to punish the messenger, who is simply doing what journalists do. Politicians are often to resent the audacity of the press – Bjelke Petersen used to call it ‘feeding the chooks’. The empire is used to embedded reporters for some years, submissive to the imperatives of America’s perpetual wars.

As for WikiLeaks’ Australian founder Julian Assange, Mr Downer said he thought that morally he was an appalling person.

“I think to do this is to undermine the interests of millions of people around the world and to degrade diplomacy and the relationships between countries all for just being some sort of public relations smart-arse.”

Those opposing Wikileaks’ professional journalism take the bait with extraordinary enthusiasm, exposing themselves in all their monstrous glory. Avoiding engagement with the global conversation, they’d like to topple the fisherman off his rock.

They don’t seem to fathom why accountability is in the public interest, nor understand the inexorable nature of the tide which leaves them high and dry.

Would the governments be howling to the moon and stars if the leaks had been delivered to Murdoch’s establishments?

Wikileak Links for Today

Why the revolution might not be tweeted; or why Gladwell was right but for different reasons
US overreaction to Wikileaks ‘looking increasingly like that of a bully’
GLW: We have a right to know
The man who knows too much
WikiLeaks and Our Boorish “In Your Face” Diplomacy
WikiLeaks Ready to Release Giant ‘Insurance’ File if Shut Down
Could WikiLeaks survive without Julian Assange?

Mass-Mirroring Wikileaks
http://wlcentral.org/node/506
Evgeny Morozov has cautioned in The Financial Times

that the US backlash against WikiLeaks and Julian Assange may have unintended consequences: “WikiLeaks could be transformed from a handful of volunteers to a global movement of politicised geeks clamouring for revenge. Today’s WikiLeaks talks the language of transparency, but it could quickly develop a new code of explicit anti-Americanism, anti-imperialism and anti-globalisation.[…] An aggressive attempt to go after WikiLeaks – by blocking its web access, for instance, or by harassing its members – could install Mr Assange (or whoever succeeds him) at the helm of a powerful new global movement able to paralyse the work of governments and corporations around the world.”

Sex, lies and diplomatic cables

Website under constant assault

On Saturday, Mr Assange said it was ”impossible” to return to Australia because of comments by Mr McClelland and the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, who labelled his actions ”illegal”.

But yesterday Mr McClelland seemed to offer some concession to the Townsville-born former hacker, saying: ”Mr Assange is entitled to the same rights as any other Australian citizen.

”This includes the right to return to Australia and also to receive consular assistance while he is overseas if that is requested.”

Mr Assange also revealed that more than 100,000 people had downloaded an ”insurance” file containing an encrypted version of the cables, and the key to that code would be released if ”something happens to us”.

Rich all of a twitter about Big Brother

Professor Tom Flanagan: Glib about Murdering Julian Assange

”Instead of Big Brother overwhelming us, all these little brothers – us – will have data through products like research.ly that will give us the ability, just like WikiLeaks has, to overwhelm Big Brother,” Rich said in an interview with the blogger Robert Scoble.

Rich said his website could create ”virtual friends groups on the fly”.
Advertisement: Story continues below

”What we need is humans to evolve to that next level so we have a collective consciousness that persists and that we can delve into to give us the data that we need to build these friends groups on the fly,” he said, in what appeared to be a new form of Orwellian doublethink.

WikiLeaks a blueprint for things to come : Mark Pesce

Everything is different now. Everything feels more authentic. We can choose to embrace this authenticity, and use it to construct a new system of relations, one which does not rely on secrets and lies. A week ago that would have sounded utopian, now it’s just facing facts

What remains of Western morality is becoming threadbare

Professor Tom Flanagan: Glib about Murdering Julian Assange
Don’t cry over WikiLeaks – Australian Legal
Assange Accuser Worked with US-Funded, CIA-Tied Anti-Castro Group
Julian Assange’s lawyers say they are being watched
Long Live the Web: A Call for Continued Open Standards and Neutrality
A Fairly Short List of Goodies for Wikileaks Santa
A Letter to PM Gillard
Wikileaks : Winning the War What’s the point of trying to shut down Wikileaks? If this past week has shown anything, it’s that cutting off the hydra’s head only results in a hundred more growing in its place.
Good luck shielding yourself from the next Wikileaks dump – diplomatic reshuffles
How to Eat the Cheese
Door open for Assange to come home – yeah right
Who Will Be TIME’s 2010 Person of the Year?
Bernie Sanders Unearths the Fed’s Sordid Details
Only WikiLeaks Can Save US Policy
Rudd defends ‘robust’ China relationship
Digital McCarthyism
And so this is Christmas
WikiLeaks cables claim al-Jazeera changed coverage to suit Qatari foreign policy
The Canberra Cables
An open letter to Malcolm Turnbull regarding Julian Assange
Operation Avenge Assange
Open letter to University of Calgary President Dr. Elizabeth Cannon regarding Dr. Tom Flanagan’s remarks
Salaries of WikiLeaks Staffers to Be Revealed in New Report

Other Links of Interest

The Flash Mob to raise awareness about Motorola’s support of Israeli human rights violation
United Nations Silent as NATO Destroys Potentially Thousands of Afghan Homes
ALBA and the Promise of Cooperative Development
Protest, arrests in Gaza over closure of youth organization
Abunimah: The Native American analogy doesn’t work
Danny Ayalon Needs To Thank Palestinians Too
New South Wales Greens embrace BDS
Nationalism: the virus and its cure
Leila Khaled Interview
Tales from the Crypt The Depraved Spies and Moguls of the CIA’s Operation Mockingbird
Israeli, Turkish diplomats meet in Geneva to repair ties
Industrial Workers of the World Union Votes to Officially Support BDS

UK Labor calls for compulsory settlement product labeling
Dick Cheney : The former VP is fingered in a massive cash-for-contract scandal in the African country’s oil-rich Niger Delta.

November 23, 2010December 11, 2020

Paul Howes, the Histadrut and Boycotts, Divestments and Sanctions of Israel

In 2005, Palestinian civil society called for solidarity from the international community and people within Israel for the institution of boycotts, divestments and sanctions against Israel similar to those instituted against apartheid South Africa until Israel recognises the right of Palestinian people for self-determination and conforms with international law. The call is supported by Palestinian political parties, unions, associations, coalitions and organizations representing the three integral parts of the people of Palestine: Palestinian refugees, Palestinians under occupation and Palestinian citizens of Israel.

These non-violent punitive measures should be maintained until Israel meets its obligation to recognize the Palestinian people’s inalienable right to self-determination and fully complies with the precepts of international law by:

1. Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the Wall;
2. Recognizing the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality; and
3. Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN resolution 194.

As Australian trade unions prepare to take a motion for BDS to the ACTU, it is important for Australian workers to understand why it is essential to support boycotts, divestments and sanctions against Israel in solidarity with Palestinian trade unions, including the Palestinian General Federation of Trade Unions (PGFTU) .

The trade union boycott works very like the consumer boycott or divestment campaign at an institutional level. It means that trade unions cut economic, social and political ties with Israel and build ties with Palestinian unions. Much the same as the huge role they took on in fighting against Apartheid South Africa, their emphasis on international workers solidarity can be a real rallying cry against Israeli Apartheid.

Trade unions need to be informed about the discriminatory nature of Israel’s Histadrut, which from its inception aimed to replace Arab workers with Jewish ones under a “conquest of labour” policy. Israel’s occupation aims to further conquer Palestinian labour through a series of joint industrial zones wherein Palestinians will essentially work as migrant workers on their own land for low wages in poor conditions without the option to organise. The Histadrut is the only trade union in Israel and continues to work on a racist framework that leaves Palestinian workers facing apartheid labour conditions in Israel itself.

To support BDS, trade unions can pass motions, measures and resolutions condemning Israeli occupation and apartheid; promote a consumer boycott among their members and citizens; change purchasing
and investment policy to ensure that trade unions are not contributing financially to the occupation; and partner with Palestinian unions.

Australians for Palestine have prepared an excellent BDS Manual for download.

The Israeli labour organisation, the Histadrut, is first and foremost a state-allied endeavour rather than a worker organisation. As Zureik says:

It is a mistake to equate the Histadrut with other, secular and universalist, trade union movements of this century. While one of the aims was to improve the conditions of the Jewish working class in Palestine, its raison d’etre was to ensure the creation of a jewish state, with Arab-Jewish working-class solidarity a secondary factor. After all, it was under the auspices of the Histadrut that the underground Zionist military force, the Haganah, was established.
…
Yago:

“However, the evolving labour bureaucracy is not to be confused with those of Western Europe or the US [or Australia]. It was not the product of a mass workers movement; rather it was always an integral part of an expressedly nationalist movement. Its task was not solely to divert working class struggles, but to eliminate part of the working class (the Palestinian Arabs) from labour market competition in order to accomplish the two-pronged state building programme of the Zionist movement – ‘conquest of labour/conquest of land’.”

The Histadrut, which approved of the outrageous Israeli Cast Lead massacre of the Gazan people in 2009, also actively supported the South African apartheidists.

Iskoor steel company, 51 percent owned by Histadrut’s Koor Industries and 49 percent by the South African Steel Corporation, manufactured steel for South Africa’s armed forces. Partly finished steel was shipped from Israel to South Africa, enabling the apartheid state to escape tariffs. [7]

Other Histadrut companies such as Tadiran and Soltam were equally complicit in supplying South Africa with weaponry. [8] Histadrut also helped build the electronic wall between South Africa/Namibia and neighboring African states in order to keep the guerrillas out. [9] It was a precursor of Israel’s wall in the West Bank.

Pinhas Lavon, secretary-general of Histadrut in 1960 described it as “a general organization to its core. It is not a trade union …”

The Histadrut has also exploited Palestinian workers and their union movement.

The exploitation of Palestinian workers from the occupied territories was institutionalized by an Israeli cabinet decision of October 1970. It provided that the military administration should supervise their employment. Their wages would be distributed by the payments department of the National Employment Service. Histadrut was a partner in this arrangement. National Insurance coverage was permitted in only three areas: work accidents, employer bankruptcy and a grant on the birth of a child in an Israeli hospital. Ten percent of the wages of Palestinian workers went to a special “Equalization Fund,” which was supposed to supply the population in the occupied territories with social and cultural services. In fact, this money was used to finance the occupation. The workers did not receive unemployment and disability benefits, old-age pensions, a monthly child allowance or vocational training.

In addition, each Palestinian worker had to pay one percent of his or her wages as dues to Histadrut. Workers saw nothing in return and now a fraction of this money has been returned, as a propaganda ploy, to the Palestinian General Federation of Trade Unions. When the Shin Bet intelligence service used work permits as a means to coerce Palestinian workers to collaborate, with those who refused being placed on a blacklist and their work permits cancelled, Histadrut again did nothing. [39]

Although many Australian unions already support BDS, AWU union boss Paul Howes seems to be under a false impression that the Histadrut is a union like any other.

“We don’t believe that it’s in the interests of Palestinian or Israeli workers to seek to divide them in the peace process,” Mr Howes said.

In a recent address to the Zionist Federation of Australia, Howes stated:

I think I am upholding that union tradition when I support the trust-building co-operative projects that the Israeli trade union movement – led by the Histadrut – and the Palestinian trade union movement – led by the PGFTU – are promoting.

If you truly believe that a-worker-is-a-worker-is-a-worker then the function of any trade union is to ensure fair pay for a fair day’s work and a safe and healthy workplace.

This applies to an Israeli worker , this applies to a Palestinian worker.

I can’t see how you can discriminate between an Israeli worker and a Palestinian worker. (Let alone a foreign worker from Asia or Africa working in Israel)

Paul appears oblivious to historical and current exploitation of and discrimination against Palestinian workers by the Histadrut as much as he is ignorant of the fact that the main Palestinian union, the Palestinian General Federation of Trade Unions’ (PGFTU), supports BDS.

In September 2009, the Histadrut claimed to have rectified some of its malfeasance.

In 1995 our two organisations signed an unprecedented agreement in which fifty percent of all dues from Palestinians employed by Israeli employers would be remitted to the PGFTU. Unfortunately, the
agreement was not fully implemented due to security conditions. However, under the auspices of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), headed by Guy Ryder, we successfully finalised and
implemented the agreement in June 2008. As a result, US$3.6 million has been transferred to the PGFTU, both in arrears and in ongoing payments.

Yet according to Kav LaOved and The Alternative Information Centre (AIC), “The Economy of the Occupation”, the Histadrut has returned but a pittance of the monies extracted from exploited Palestinian workers:

“The calculated amount of debt without interest is NIS 3.082 billion, and with interest the amount reaches NIS 8.350 billion. It is important to note that this calculation is accurate to 2009, in 2008 prices, and does not include central elements for which information is not available. The calculation is therefore lacking.”

And further skullduggery:

“Addititionally, the Department deducted an additional 2.74% for a Provident Fund and health tax, which were included in the same package of deductions as organising fees for the Histadrut. The health tax covered health insurance of the workers in the OPT. It is unknown to us where the money deducted for the Provident Fund went and on what authority it was deducted.

“On the basis of a circular of the Department of Payments, we know that for the Provident Fund, NIS 0.54 were taken from every worker in the construction sector for each day of work at least until 1993, ie. 3.1% of their salary. From here we calculated that from 1970 to 1993, NIS 152 million (in 2008 prices) were taken from them for the Provident Fund. We do not know if this deduction continued after 1993, but we do know that the workers did not receive a Provident Fund.

“Under the false definition of Palestinians as ‘daily’ or ‘temporary’ workers, a majority of the benefits determined in the collective bargaining agreements of the Histadrut with the employers were stolen from Palestinian workers, including increments for security, family upkeep, grants for not missing work, a 13th salary in the agricultural sector and more.

The Histradut has expressed its support for removing “security checkpoints in the context of the renewed security situation” and called upon “the Israeli government to dismantle all illegal outposts.” It also supports the abandoned Roadmap and collapsed two state solution, yet does not expressedly support the end to Israeli colonialism in the Occupied Territories. Nor does the Histadrut protect Palestinian workers in the illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

“The settlement factories are manned primarily by Palestinian labourers, who work in miserable conditions”, says Fathi Nasser, legal advisor with the Palestinian General Federation of Trade Unions (PGFTU). “The employers of these factories disregard labour laws and should the worker complain, he will be dismissed”. According to Nasser, as it is so difficult to obtain authorisation to take a case before an Israeli court, providing real legal protection to these workers is very complicated.

…

The Democracy and Workers Rights Centre (DWRC) tries to protect workers by educating workers on how to use their rights. “Officially, Palestinian workers in the West Bank’s industrial zones are entitled to the protection of Israeli labour laws but employers find many ways to avoid giving Palestinians their rights”, DWRC’s coordinator of the Legal Aid and Human Rights Project, Hwayda told us. The organisation was created in response to the failure of Israel’s major labour union, Histadrut, to represent Palestinian workers.

No excuses, Paul Howes, it’s time for you to move to the right side of history. Do not put a cold-blooded thirst for the political approval of the duplicitous Australian zionist lobby before the call of Palestinian workers. You’ve shown you can stand up for justice for Australian workers. Let’s see your real mettle – can you change your mind when faced with the facts? Support BDS and help Palestinian people achieve freedom and justice.

As Palestinian Rifat Odeh Kassis from Kairos says:

If you reject BDS as a valid way to call for change, and as a right in and of itself – a right that should be defended by any true democracy – then what other means do you propose for creating peace in our region? In a time when bloodshed has been the primary tactic, negotiations are an exercise in humiliation, and voices like yours continue to suggest that Palestinians have no rights to defend in the first place, BDS is an effective, nonviolent tool that strengthens – and unites – Israeli and Palestinian peacemakers alike.

November 23, 2010December 11, 2020

Taking down the Lobby

If AIPAC can be challenged in the US, perhaps its Zionist brethren can be nobbled in Australia as well. Donations should not be tax deductible when they are used for acts which are illegal under international laws and treaties to which countries are parties, such as Israel’s criminal grab of ‘national’ heritage sites which are located in the illegally occupied West Bank.

IRmep director Grant F. Smith and callers grilled IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman on National Public Radio January 1, 2010 over lax IRS enforcement toward some Israel-related nonprofits committing illegal acts overseas and violating U.S. tax laws. Shulman assured America that, “If a charity is breaking the tax law, is engaged in activities that they are not supposed to be engaged in, we certainly will go after them. Every year we pull 501(c)(3) charity status from a number of charities. We’ve got thousands of audits going on regarding charities, and so we don’t hesitate to administer the tax laws and make sure that people are following the rules.”

November 19, 2010December 11, 2020

Australian Zionist Organisation Funding Appropriation of West Bank Sites

The initial piece in the Jerusalem Post alerted the world to some scurrilous shenanigans perpetrated by the United Israel Appeal’s New South Wales branch:

‘A major Zionist organization has withdrawn an advertisement because it featured images mocking the torture of prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. The United Israel Appeal (New South Wales) – Keren Hayesod last week withdrew the ad for a young adult UIA event, which was issued as a press release as well as on a Facebook page.’

Looking for a story behind the news, we investigated where the funds of the United Israel Appeal are disbursed.

In October, the Israel-based parent body of the United Israel Appeal, Keren Hayesod, sealed a deal with the Israeli government.

‘Leading the projects that Keren Hayesod will support is Prime Minister’s Office project regarding national heritage sites. Keren Hayesod has taken it upon itself to raise funds in order to supplement the Government budget and expand the scope of the project.’.

As is customary with its illegal apartheid wall, the majority of which is sited on the Palestinian land across the 1967 Green Line, Israel stretches the boundaries of what it regards as ‘national’.

On February 21, 2010, Netanyahu presented a Cabinet Communique outlining earmark funding of the national heritage project.

I would like to add three short comments.

– The list of sites submitted here is neither closed nor final. It can and will certainly include other sites. I also intend to include Rachel’s Tomb, to the rehabilitation of which the Jewish Agency has allocated NIS 20 million, and the Tomb of the Patriarchs. Since I was asked, I would like to make my intentions clear, and this is what will be.

– The donations that we are talking about here are earmarks. The list submitted here is the Government’s earmarked budget, even though we hope to receive the assistance of many other elements.

– We will meet again this week in order to approve the national transportation plan that will join the Galilee and the other parts of the State of Israel in an accessible national transportation grid, and which will – inter alia – bring people to this wonderful place. I think that it will greatly contribute to bringing the periphery closer to the center and vice-versa, itself a great economic contribution.”

What is Keren Hayesod’s relationship with the Jewish Agency?

Keren Hayesod is headed by a board of trustees, appointed by the Zionist Executive and the Jewish Agency. In addition to financing the activities of the Jewish Agency, Keren Hayesod undertook to support the yishuv economically and to provide financial assistance for development and settlement. Most revenues come from fundraising and are distributed by the institutions of the Zionist movement. Keren Hayesod collects donations in almost all countries with a Jewish community, either directly or through volunteers.

UNESCO has recently insisted that Israel remove the Cave of the Patriachs and Rachel’s Tomb, both located in the Palestinian West Bank, from its list of national heritage sites as they are sites of mosques. Abbas and Haniyeh have also insisted the sites be removed from Netanyahu’s proposed national heritage trail. Netanyahu has refused to do so.

Through its funding arrangements with its Israeli parent body, the United Israel Appeal New South Wales branch is complicit with Israeli commandeering of ‘national’ heritage sites in the West Bank.

‘In NSW, 50% of Women’s Division funds are allocated to The Nurit Absorption Centre , located in Be’er Sheva. The remaining 50% of funds raised are incorporated into the universal revenue of Keren Hayesod in Israel.’

Under its never-fully implemented Declaration of Establishment of 1948, Israel undertook to safeguard the holy sites of all religions. Israel has failed to fulfill its promise. As the 2008 US State Department Human Rights Report: Israel and the occupied territories states:

The 1967 Protection of Holy Sites Law protects all holy sites, but the government implemented regulations only for 137 Jewish sites, leaving many Muslim and Christian sites neglected, inaccessible, or threatened by property development. The Holy Sepulchre and other well-known sites have de facto protection as a result of their international importance; however, community mosques, churches, and shrines often faced threats from developers and municipalities that Jewish sites did not face. Christian pilgrimage sites around the Sea of Galilee faced regular threats of encroachment from district planners who wanted to use parts of the properties for recreation.

The just-released 2009 US State Department International Report on Religious Freedom reiterates the problems noted in the previous year’s report:

The 1967 Protection of Holy Sites Law applies to holy sites of all religious groups within the country and in all of Jerusalem, but the Government implements regulations only for Jewish sites. Non-Jewish holy sites do not enjoy legal protection under it because the Government does not recognize them as official holy sites. At the end of 2008, there were 137 designated holy sites, all of which were Jewish. Furthermore, the Government has drafted regulations to identify, protect, and fund only Jewish holy sites. While well-known sites have de facto protection as a result of their international importance, many Muslim and Christian sites are neglected, inaccessible, or threatened by property developers and municipalities. The Christian pilgrimage sites around the Sea of Galilee face periodic threats of encroachment from district planners who want to use parts of their properties for recreation. In the past, only diplomatic interventions have forestalled such efforts. Such sites do, however, enjoy certain protections under the general Penal Law (criminal code), which makes it a criminal offense to damage any holy site. Following a 2007 order by the High Court to explain its unequal implementation of the 1967 Protection of Holy Sites Law, the Government responded in March 2008 that specific regulations were not necessary for the protection of any holy sites. The Government did not explain why it therefore promulgated regulations for Jewish sites but not for non-Jewish sites.

Donations to the United Israel Appeal are tax deductible so untaxed Australian income can be diverted overseas to fund Israeli ‘national heritage’ projects in the illegally occupied West Bank. Frank Lowy is a Life Governor of the UIA while son Steven Lowy is Chairman, Major Donor Division.

Frank Lowy’s money ended up in Israeli charities from his untaxed Liechenstein bank accounts.

And this is from the Murdoch press back home:

Just prior to being appointed to the RBA board in 1995, Frank Lowy paid $25million to settle a long-running tax dispute with the Australian Taxation Office.

That dispute related to a $48.3 million payment received by a Lowy family company, Cordera Holdings. Three days after a court hearing began, a settlement was reached. In mid-February this year, German tax authorities conducted raids on dozens of prominent businessman for allegedly using Liechtenstein bank accounts, and two weeks later the ATO announced there were 20 audit cases under way relating to funds in Liechtenstein ranging from $200,000 to millions of dollars.

Why hasn’t the ATO done anything about this yet? Any reporters asking questions over here? Or is Lowy too powerful on his home pitch?

The Murdoch media repeatedly stresses that:

There is no suggestion the Lowys are the subject of the Australian or US investigations.

No, they are just being called to give evidence at a Senate inquiry about dodgy tax schemes, where they have previous form. I am sure they are just popping in for a little chat, that’s all. Lowy was also linked to a corruption scandal involving Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, but I’m sure that Mr Olmert is just a very nice man too.
…
But according to Lowy, those Israeli charities got ALL the money:

“The report fails to mention the fact that all of the funds held in the structure in the Liechtenstein bank were distributed for charitable purposes in Israel some years ago,” he said.

Lowy is a long-term donator to Keren Hayesod.

Brog, who described Lowy’s politics in Israel as “centre-left”, said he believed he had also been a strong supporter of, and donor to, the Labour Party. He had also been a “very, very generous donor to Keren Hayesod” since the 1980s, Brog said.

“And I would expect that that financial support has only increased in the years since.”

According to a handful of Australian and Israeli businessmen who are active in Israel and keep an eye on Lowy’s movements in that country, the money that he puts into the Institute for National Security Studies and Keren Hayesod are the two main concerns he devotes time to outside his business interests.

UPDATES

Translation: Visiting Hebron is a must, but do make sure you see everything

When visiting the Cave of the Patriarchs one must not only explore the well-tended and re-paved Jewish part of the cave. One must also enter the Muslim side, though access is not as convenient. You can also visit the deserted Shuhada Street with the ubiquitous IDF positions everywhere. Tamar Golan and Michal Tsadik from Machsom Watch

Israeli education: Molding fascists, one student at a time
The Tax-Exempt Status of Charities that Support Israeli Settlements

UPDATE 6/2/12

The theft by heritage stealth continues:

Asked about the politicization of national heritage sites, he answers very seriously: “The fact that we are located within the Prime Minister’s Office gives us a status and presence that we wouldn’t have if we were part of a ministry. It is impossible to ignore us. Everyone sees us as the right people to approach.”

He says the prime minister and cabinet secretary are involved and interested in the national heritage project, but do not dictate what is to be done. Furthermore, recent cuts at government ministries did not affect his project.

“The decision to place heritage sites on the agenda is a legitimate political decision, but that is where the politics stops. Beyond that, everything stems from professional considerations. There is a lot of pressure on us, but it comes from local council heads. Many of them think I have piles of money to distribute.”

The list of 220 proposed sites includes 30 in the West Bank. Five have either been approved or have a good chance of getting the green light for financial support and development from Pinsker and his colleagues. But the issue of whether a potential site is located inside or outside the Green Line does not seem relevant to Pinsky. “The question from my perspective is: How many visitors could we bring to the site after we decide to invest in it? It doesn’t matter to me if it’s in Judea and Samaria or Tel Aviv.”

Pinsky says he is, however, aware of the criticism the project may encounter. “If someone suggests building an elevator in the Cave of the Patriarchs, because it is an important site, I would consider this based on its merits,” he explains. “But because the site is a sensitive place, I would first submit a recommendation to the prime minister. I would not promote it on my own.”

Pinsky gently criticizes the council heads in West Bank areas who, he says, “thought that the fact that a kippah-wearer was appointed to the job guarantees that their issues would be taken care of. Very quickly they realized things don’t work that way and that we arrive at our decisions in a very focused way.”

At last year’s UIA gala fundraiser in Sydney, president Bruce Fink said it had raised $16 million, making it the “highest per capita campaign in the Keren Hayesod world.”

Shopping mall magnate Frank Lowy, a life governor of the UIA who fought in the 1948 War of Independence, reminded the 1,000-plus donors in the audience of the countless lives lost defending Israel. “We must recognize our responsibilities and pay our dues,” Lowy said.

Burla believes discontent is mounting among the younger generation of Australian Jews, despite the country being “arguably the most Zionist Jewish community in the Diaspora.”

“In particular, the lack of trust reflects a growing sense among the younger generation of the Australian Diaspora that Israel sees Australian Jewry as a resource that can be used for its own needs, without any accountability or mutual responsibility,” Burla wrote at the time of the scandal surrounding the death of Australian-born Ben Zygier, an alleged Mossad agent who committed suicide inside an Israeli maximum-security prison in 2010.

November 19, 2010December 11, 2020

National Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2010

Anti-terrorism laws have now been altered in Australia with some expansions of police powers and conditions that limit free speech. There has been little attention paid to these changes within the Australian media – the equal rights for gay marriage parliamentary debate has taken precedence.

“The National Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2010 seeks to achieve an appropriate balance between the Government’s responsibility to protect Australia, its people and its interests and instilling confidence that our national security and counter-terrorism laws will be exercised in a just and accountable way,” Mr McClelland said.

The legislation has been the subject of extensive public consultation and contains significant amendments, including:

* new powers for police to enter a premises without a warrant in emergency circumstances relating to a terrorism offence where there is material that may pose a risk to the health or safety of the public;
* extending the time available for police to re-enter a premises under a search warrant from one hour to 12 hours in emergency circumstances;
* establishing a maximum seven day limit on the detention period that may be disregarded when a person has been arrested for a terrorism offence;
* including a specific right of appeal for both the prosecution and the defendant against a bail decision relating to terrorism and serious national security offences;
* expanding the ‘urging violence’ offence so that it applies to individuals as well as groups who incite violence on the basis of race, religion, nationality, national or ethnic origin or political opinion;
* extending the expiration period of regulations proscribing a terrorist organisation from two to three years;
* amending the National Security Information (Criminal and Civil Proceedings) Act 2004 so that national security and counter-terrorism court proceedings may be expedited;
* establishing a Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement to extend parliamentary oversight to both the Australian Federal Police and the Australian Crime Commission; and
* extending the role of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security (IGIS) to inquire into an intelligence or security matter relating to any Commonwealth Department or agency.

There is still no independent National Security Monitor established.

The Australian Council for Civil Liberties president, Terry O’Gorman, says Australia should have followed Britain’s lead five years ago in appointing someone to oversee the application of counter-terrorism laws.