Category: Zionism

Posted on

Reports, Reports, Reports

(1) DSCA Releases FY2010 Sales Figures

US military sales overseen by the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) topped $30 billion for the third consecutive year. Total sales for fiscal year 2010 were $31.6 billion. Sales under the government-to-government sales program called Foreign Military Sales (FMS) were $25.2 billion. Non-FMS security cooperation cases managed by DSCA under various security cooperation authorities were $6.4 billion.

The DoD program for support of Afghanistan’s security forces using the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund (ASFF) made up the majority of non-FMS security cooperation cases in fiscal year 2010 and totaled some $4.7 billion. This reflected continued support to the Government of Afghanistan in its fight against the Taliban and other insurgent forces. This ASFF-funded support was for training and equipping of the
Afghanistan National Security Forces. Non-FMS security cooperation cases also provided support to other foreign governments, including Iraq and Pakistan.

The Government of Israel at $4.0 billion led the FMS customer list with the highest value in sales followed by the Government of Egypt at $2.6 billion. Israel and Egypt are also the largest recipients of Foreign Military Financing (FMF) funds appropriated by Congress through the State Department to be used to pay for purchases of U.S. defense articles and services. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia at $2.5 billion and the Government of the United Kingdom at $1.8 billion rounded out the top four FMS customers in terms of the value of sales.

(2) 2009 Human Rights Report: Israel and the occupied territories

The 1967 Protection of Holy Sites Law protects all holy sites, but the government implemented regulations only for 137 Jewish sites, leaving Muslim and Christian sites neglected, inaccessible, or threatened by property development. The Church of 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 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 government planners who wanted to use parts of the properties for recreational areas. The law provides for a hearing of objections to any plan or construction, including submissions by representative bodies such as the NGO Arab Center for Alternative Planning.

On March 16, the Supreme Court rejected Adalah’s 2004 petition requesting that the government promulgate regulations for the protection of Islamic holy sites. The government maintained that the promulgation of specific regulations, including determining how to expand the list of holy sites, was not necessary to preserve and protect the holy sites of any religion since the law provided for the protection of all holy sites of all religions.

(3) The 2010 Israeli Democracy Index: Democratic Values in Practice

Some of the findings:

  • Israel’s high incarceration rate, combined with inadequacies in the rule of law, cause it to fall short of the accepted standard in Western countries.
  • 60% of the population in Israel thinks that a few strong leaders would be better for Israel than all the democratic debates and legislation. 59% of that same group would prefer a government of experts who make decisions based on professional rather than political considerations.
  • 86% of the Jewish public (76% of the total population) thinks that critical decisions for the state should be made by the Jewish majority.
  • 53% of the Jewish public also believe that the State is entitled to encourage the emigration of Arabs.
  • 70% of Israel’s population thinks that there is no justification whatsoever for using violence in order to achieve political goals.
  • 81% of the population agrees with the assertion that “democracy is not a perfect regime, but it is better than any other form of government.” However, 55% of the public believes that Israel should put observing the law and public order before the ideals of democracy. Of the Jewish respondents, 60% of those on the political right supported this idea compared with 50% of those in the center and 49% of those on the left.
  • 54%, slightly more than half the general population in Israel today, state that they have full or partial confidence in the Supreme Court, compared with 44% who claim that they have no confidence in it at all.
  • Only 41% of respondents said that they have full or partial confidence in the police force.
  • 72% of the population say that they do not trust the political parties, although a 63% majority oppose the view that parties are no longer needed and should therefore be abolished.
  • Compared with 45% of Arab respondents, 69% of the Jewish population claims that the constitution is important to them.
  • 43% of the general population feels that it is equally important for Israel to be a Jewish and democratic country, while 31% regards the Jewish component as being more important, and only 20% defines the democratic element as being more important.
  • 41% of the population believes that freedom of religion and speech are implemented adequately; however, 39% believe that human rights are not sufficiently implemented.
  • 72% of the general public thinks that Israel’s democracy is adversely affected by the increase in socio-economic gaps.
  • 54% of the Jewish public opposes the view that legislation should be passed penalizing anyone who speaks out against Zionism.
  • 50% of the Jewish respondents agree that it is important to allow non-Zionist political parties to participate in elections.
  • 56% of veteran Israelis agree that people who have refused to serve in the IDF should not be allowed to vote or stand in elections. 62% of immigrants from the FSU disagree with this, while 76% of the ultra-Orthodox public rejects the idea.
  • 51% of the general public approves of equality of rights between Jews and Arabs. The more Orthodox the group, the greater the opposition to equal rights between Jews and Arabs: only 33.5% of secular Jews oppose this, compared with 51% of traditional Jews, 65% of Orthodox Jews and 72% of ultra-Orthodox Jews.
  • 67% of the Jewish public believe that close relatives of Arabs should not be permitted to enter Israel under of the rubric of family unification.
  • Almost two-thirds (62%) of Jews believe that as long as Israel is in conflict with the Palestinians, the views of Arab citizens of Israel on foreign policy and security matters should not be taken into consideration.
  • 51.5% of the Jewish sample agrees that only immigrants who are Jewish as defined by Halakha should be entitled to receive Israeli citizenship automatically, while only 34.5% of immigrants from the FSU agree with it. By segmentation, 41% of secular Jews and 88% of ultra-Orthodox agree, while traditional Jews and Orthodox Jews fall in the middle, with 63% and 79% respectively.
  • 55% of the general public thinks that more resources should be allocated to Jewish municipalities than to Arab municipalities, while a 42% minority disagrees with this statement.
  • Within the Jewish public, 71% of right-wing supporters agree that more resources should be allocated to Jewish municipalities than to Arab municipalities, as compared to 46% of centrists and 38% of leftists. When segmented by degree of religious observance, 51% of ultra-Orthodox Jews agree with the statement, while 45% of Orthodox Jews, 28% of traditional Jews, and 18% of secular Jews agree with it.
  • 39% of the general population supports equal funding of religious services while 35% oppose it. Taking only the Jewish population into account, 41% support equal funding of religious services, while 33% oppose it.
  • 54% of the general population supports equal funding of schools, while 26% oppose it.
  • 46% of the Jewish public admitted to being most bothered by the possibility of having Arabs as neighbors. This was followed equally by people with mental illness being treated in the community and foreign workers (39% each). 25% would be bothered by same-sex couples, 23% by ultra-Orthodox Jews, 17% by Ethiopian immigrants, 10% by non-Sabbath observers, and 8% by immigrants from the Former Soviet Union.
  • The Arab public is less tolerant than Jews of neighbors who are “Other.” 70% thought the least desirable neighbors would be same-sex couples and 67% were opposed to having ultra-Orthodox Jews as neighbors, followed closely by 65% who would be opposed to former settlers. 48% answered that the most “tolerable” neighbors would be foreign workers.
Posted on

NGO Monitor – Watching the Watchers Redux

The Israeli hasbara organisation, NGO Monitor, has taken foul, unsubstantiated swipes at Electronic Intifada and its co-founder Ali Abunimah.

NGO Monitor’s International Advisory Board consists of:

Elie Wiesel
Professor Alan Dershowitz
Fiamma Nirenstein
Elliott Abrams
Amb. Yehuda Avner
Tom Gross
Col. Richard Kemp
Douglas Murray
Judea Pearl
Judge Abraham Sofaer
Ruth Wisse
R. James Woolsey

Several of these individuals have cross-over links with US neocon and pro-Israel establishments. Click on highlighted names to find out these people’s associations and in which organisations they are involved. Some of these include the Committee on the Present Danger, Avi Chai Foundation, JINSA, Koret Foundation and the Hoover Institution. The Koret Foundation is also a major donor to NGO Monitor.

As noted in October 09, one of NGO Monitor’s co-sponsors is the Wechsler Foundation, a non-profit [sic], tax-exempt US organisation, which, along with other US-based sponsors, pad NGO Monitor with US taxpayer funds to undermine the work of peace organisations in Israel and Palestine, and the independent journalism represented by Electronic Intifada, in the interests of the Israeli and US economic elite.

Another of NGO Monitor’s major funders is the United Jewish Communities, which was formed from the 1999 merger of United Jewish Appeal (UJA), Council of Jewish Federations and United Israel Appeal, Inc and the Jewish Federations of North America (JFNA), which partners with the Jewish Agency in Israel.

From the JFNA site:

United Israel Appeal (UIA), as part of The Jewish Federations of North America (JFNA), is a principal link between the American Jewish community and the people of Israel. An independent legal entity, UIA is responsible for the distribution and oversight of funds raised by U.S. Federation campaigns on behalf of Israel for use by its operating agent, the Jewish Agency for Israel, and for securing and monitoring funds for the immigration and absorption of Jewish refugees and humanitarian migrants to Israel from countries of distress. It is with the Jewish Agency as our partner, that UIA assists American Jews to fulfill their ongoing collective commitment to contribute to and participate in the upbuilding of the Jewish State of Israel.

Further:

UIA allocates and monitors funds raised by Federation campaigns in the U.S. for UIA’s operating agent JAFI, Israeli NGO’s and the over 1000 physical projects constructed in Israel with funds from U.S. donors.

As recounted on this blog several days ago, the Israel-based parent body of the United Israel Appeal, Keren Hayesod, sealed a deal with the Israeli government in October 2010.

‘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.’.

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

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.

UNESCO 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 requested the sites be removed from Netanyahu’s proposed national heritage trail. Netanyahu has refused to do so.

In essence, US taxpayer money is diverted through Israeli front organisations in the US, which also fund NGO Monitor, to illegal Israeli government projects in the Occupied Territories.

You can donate to worthy online journalism at Electronic Intifada here.

UPDATE

Haaretz journalist doubles as anti-“delegitimization” operative

Haaretz has an international reputation as Israel’s most liberal and reliable newspaper. But The Electronic Intifada has discovered that one of the newspaper’s regularly-featured reporters, Cnaan Liphshiz, used his news reports for the publication to promote the agenda of an extreme pro-Israel group with which he was also employed.

At the same time, Liphshiz appears to have made efforts to conceal his work with the Dutch Zionist group CIDI (Centre for Documentation and Information on Israel), an undisclosed conflict of interest which calls into question the reliability of his reports and the editorial standards of Haaretz.

From 2007 until the present, Liphshiz has written about 50 articles in Haaretz which quote information provided by CIDI or its executive director Ronny Naftaniel, usually without offering any countervailing opinion or sources. Many of Liphshiz’s stories are based entirely on information provided by CIDI.

CIDI has confirmed to The Electronic Intifada that Lipshiz worked for the organization, and is likely to work for them again in the future.

CIDI has earned a reputation as one of the staunchest advocates for Israel in the Netherlands, launching stinging personal attacks and smears on public figures and groups who dare to call on Israel to respect human rights. In an article for The Electronic Intifada, Stan van Houcke, a Dutch journalist and author, described CIDI as an organization whose main goal is to cover up Israel’s violations of international law (“Dutch ‘research’ group covers for Israeli crimes,” violations, 5 November 2007).

UPDATE 10/2/12

What can public records tell us about NGO Monitor’s funding sources?

Posted on

Why Israel ‘Peace’ Negotiations Are Always Fake

These are the truths a twitter friend in Gaza told me during the Cast Lead massacre: 8/1/09

@rafahkid: ‘Israel can’t survive w/out resources on Palestinian land. This is why there’s no peace. If Palestine was allowed Israel would choke’.

@rafahkid: ‘Binational state? Not a chance because #Israel has to be Jewish. Two states? Not a chance because Palestine has the resources. So, we die.’

@rafahkid: ‘#Gaza truth. #Israel has to destroy Palestine if it is to survive. The world has chosen Israel. Excuse us while we die without surrender’

@rafahkid: ‘Palestine will accept #Israel but Israel can never accept Palestine. If we gave up ROR & had ’67 borders then Israel would cease to be viable.’

@rafahkid: ‘Wouldn’t mind if people acknowledged these truths but instead they pretend it’s the fault of Palestinian people…and call Hamas terrorists.’

@rafahkid: ‘Hello Israel. We actually want peace but your masters are lying to you. Pls visit #Gaza yourselves (now is not a good time) & you will see’

Jinjirrie: So, folks, now you know why ‘peace’ talks are a cover for accelerated Israeli land theft, and a means to obscure ongoing genocide by Israel

Jinjirrie: For #Israel Palestinians are surplus sub-humans, inconvenient impediments. & the US colludes with Israel in its sick deceptions. #imperialism

Posted on

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.”

Posted on

Ali Abunimah in Santa Fe, New Mexico

Recently, Ali Abunimah lectured despite zionist objections at the University of New Mexico. He was interviewed by Mary-Charlotte at Santa Fe Radio-Cafe.

“So what precisely does it mean to have a Jewish state? If here in the United States we have the protections and the right to live the way we want to, to raise our children the way we want to, respecting the rights of others, why would we need to declare the United States to be a Jewish state, or a Christian state, or a White state, or any other kind of state. And exactly the same applies in Palestine. If the concept of a Jewish state is a state where you have special privileges and special rights because you are a Jew, that is not a concept of a Jewish state that anyone should defend or support, but if you are talking about a country in which there is a large Jewish community that enjoys all the protections of the law, that it gets to live the way it wants like any other community, then that is a good thing, that’s what I am talking about.”

Listen to the entire interview.