Category: Zionism

Posted on

Apartheid Israel’s Abuse of Palestinian Children Prisoners

Human rights organisations have highlighted Said’s treatment by Israel because they say it is extreme. And it is. Please watch this video.

Every year, according to Defence for Children International, around 700 Palestinian minors between the ages of 12 and 17 are arrested in the West Bank and are tried in Israeli Military Courts.

Detention Bulletin – Issue 32 – August 2012

In this issue: 195 children held in Israeli military detention at the end of August 2012; new military order (1685) affecting children still not translated into Arabic; former Israeli soldiers break the silence about the treatment of Palestinian children during military operations – testimonies disclose a pattern of beatings and intimidation.

Palestinian children are also targets for violence by Israeli settler terrorists.

On 26 August 2012, three Israeli settler children, aged between 12 and 13 years, were arrested on suspicion of involvement in the attack. One boy was conditionally released by a civilian judge on 29 August, and the other two were conditionally released the following day. This case highlights the discriminatory nature of the legal systems applied by the Israeli authorities in the West Bank. Whilst settler children are processed through Israel’s juvenile justice system and generally released on bail, Palestinian children accused of similar offences are prosecuted in military courts which deny children bail in at least 87 percent of cases, and have a conviction rate of 99.74 percent.

Palestine / Israel Links

This is the disgusting reality of Israel’s sickening apartheid: ‘The IDF’s Civil Administration is preventing the Palestinian Authority from laying a water pipe that would alleviate the acute water shortage for more than 600,000 Palestinian
s in the West Bank.

The reason given for preventing the pipe’s construction is that a section of less than two kilometers of it, laid on the margins of Route 50, would disrupt Jewish passenger traffic on the road.’

Posted on

Ilan Pappé on the Apartheid Israeli Regime

Here’s the podcast of Ilan Pappé, interviewed by Geraldine Doogue on Radio National. Ilan is speaking at several engagements in Australia and appeared at the Festival of Dangerous Ideas in Sydney. He also appeared on Q and A. Accurately, Ilan stated: “Israel wants to remain a racist state and a democratic state – this is an oxymoron.”

Ilan Pappé on the National Press Club 19/9/12

Celebrated Israeli historian, Ilan Pappé whose landmark publication, “The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine” documented the planned removal of 700,000 Palestinians from their lands in 1948, has written a new book “The Forgotten Palestinians”.

In the book, and at this September 16 community meeting at Sydney University, Pappé reveals the situation for the Palestinians who still live within Israel’s borders.

This was the first event of Professor Pappé’s 2012 Australian lecture tour. It was hosted by the Sydney Peace Foundation at the University of Sydney with the Coalition for Justice and Peace in Palestine and Leichhardt Friends of Hebron. Professor Pappé is in Australia as the guest of AFOPA to deliver the annual Edward Said Memorial Lecture at the University of Adelaide.

Ilan Pappé’s Melbourne address.

The two state solution is an hegemonic Israeli plan … to incorporate the West Bank. Its time has passed … Israel will ghettoise the West Bank. You have to decolonise the land, the people, to liberate them, it’s too early to talk about peace, you have to end oppression first. Only then can people can sit down and talk about what comes after the oppressive reality. The horse sees things differently from the rider, the rider does not see things in the same way.

The first but not the only way of convincing political elites that their way is the wrong way is pressure from the outside. BDS is part of what we should do, to send a political message that what Israel is doing is unacceptable. Constructive dialogue with Israeli Jews, educating them to see what life would be like after the oppression ends is important.

You need all ingredients to be in place, you won’t do it solely through BDS.

…

Oslo was oppression by other means.

UPDATE 28/9/12

Desegregating The Conflict: The History Of Collaborative Struggle In Palestine, Collaborative Struggle Conference, 24.09.2012 at the University of Woollongong

2012 ESML Presented By Ilan Pappe

Israel’s bravest historian

UPDATE 23/9/12

Notes from Middle East Reality Check on Ilan Pappé’s Festival of Dangerous Ideas address on the subject Israel Is an Apartheid State:

Is this a dangerous idea? Many Israelis wouldn’t think so. Nor South Africans. Nor many journalists and progressive folk in the West. Liberal Zionists though find it dangerous, and for many years have been trying to square the circle in an attempt to justify Israel’s apartheid policies. Jewish communities, of course, are allergic to the very idea. No, it’s not the recognition that Israel is an apartheid state that’s dangerous, it’s Israel itself that is dangerous; dangerous to Palestinians, dangerous to Jews in Israel and abroad, and dangerous to the world beyond.

Apartheid is a generic term for a legal, economic, social and political regime based on dispossession, discrimination and segregation on the basis of race, religion or nationality. The early Zionists, who were prolific diarists, described the Palestinians as dangerous aliens and usurpers. Their resistance to Zionist colonisation led the colonisers to develop apartheid policies of self-segregation and gated communities, which they forced on the native population once they’d become a ruling majority in 1948.

They institutionalised segregation, forcing on the Palestinian minority in Israel an invisible apartheid based on restricted living spaces, double standards in the courts and reduced access to state benefits. The Palestinian Israelis are confined to enclaves, with no new Arab towns being built since 1948. In contrast, hundreds of Jewish settlements have been constructed. In the West Bank, apartheid is starkly visible. Gaza of course is a world on its own, a large ghetto. How ironic that the people who most suffered from policies based on demography and population control in Europe should be dishing it out to others in Palestine.

Update 19/9/12:

Ilan Pappé on QandA

Ilan Pappe likens Israel’s invasion of Palestine to Aboriginal dispossession

The premise of Terra Nullius, in which European settlers viewed Australia as an unoccupied space, is similar to the idea that the Palestinians willingly gave up their land.

Understanding and accepting this premise is one of the keys to reconciliation and forging a peaceful future, Professor Pappe says.

“Building reconciliation on the basis of these acknowledgments, understanding what kind of privilege you’re going to lose if you accept you are the dispossessor, and so many other issues that are really comparable. If you are an average Australian who accepts the basic narrative of what happened in Australia, the comparison is very clear.

“It is a problem of not accepting indigeneity, and claiming that it was either settled or disappeared or can be handled, instead of accepting it. Settlers and native people always have a complex relationship but the first step is acknowledging that this is the basic paradigm, the basic reality.”

Another historical comparison is that of apartheid South Africa, Professor Pappe says. Invoking the word “apartheid” is highly provocative; the term has legal implications as well as emotive ones, but he is resolute that the name is justified.

The ideology of apartheid – of separation, of segregation – is not dissimilar in the two countries, he says, arguing that Archbishop Desmond Tutu has also drawn the comparison between the two situations. “I don’t think it’s too strong a term. As a scholar I would like to go deeply into the comparison and see the similarities as well as the dissimilarities. But from the general perspective of what kind of attitude Jews have towards non-Jews in the state of Israel, I don’t know of a better term in a legal realm in that respect.”

South Africa did manage eventually to overcome the bitter policy of apartheid, and so too can Israel, Professor Pappe believes, but it must involve what he describes as “the three As”: acknowledgement, acceptance and accountability. Israeli, Jewish and Western acknowledgement that ethnic cleansing has occurred and that refugees want to return to their homeland; Israeli accountability for what has happened in the past; and an acceptance in the Arab world and among Palestinians that the Jewish nation is part of the Middle East.

It is not a completely hopeless prospect, he says, but accepts that it is very difficult for those with established standpoints to move beyond those and make a fundamental shift about how they view the problem before a solution can be found. And a solution is fundamental for the two nations, the region and the rest of the world.

“The future of Palestine is not just the future of Jews and Palestinians who live there, it’s the future of the relationship of the Arab and Muslim worlds with the west,” he said in an earlier lecture.

ABC Radio Conversation Hour with Jon Faine, Claire Bowditch & Greg Jericho Tuesday 18 Sep 2012

Related Links

Ilan Pappe in Australia at Coalition for Justice & Peace in Palestine (CJPP)
Radio National Breakfast makes Palestinians peripheral to their own dispossession, and invites zionist Morris to respond to Pappé
Danby’s petulant criticism of the ABC having Pappé on QandA

Posted on

Israel Shoots Palestinian Children

Tomer Rot, former Israeli soldier: “I understood the reality we are creating … because there’s an entire population, that’s stepped on, pissed on, trampled on … and it’s sad.”

How the Israeli army treats Palestinian children

Israeli soldiers tell how they routinely harass Palestinian families and sometimes shoot children involved in protests. Their testimony was given to campaigning group Breaking the Silence. Video by Ruth Pollard.

…

The Israel Defence Forces’ arbitrary use of violence against Palestinian children, including forcing them to act as human shields in military operations, has been exposed by veteran soldiers in detailed statements chronicling dozens of brutal incidents.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/children-on-front-line-in-the-west-bank-20120826-24uhw.html

Breaking the Silence is limited in its discourse. As illustrated in the video below, Breaking the Silence’s activity is based on the ABSOLUTE REFUSAL TO BREAK THE SILENCE as well as PROTECT those who perpetrated crimes, sometimes as serious as war-crimes.

we are here to call on people to take responsibility

you and the people around you in the city

on the actions that the army is doing today, now, tonight

tonight, forces will enter Hebron into houses

and will perform activities

to quote the language of the military order:

“disrupting of daily life in the neighborhood”

in order to create that feeling of the oppressed, that Nadav referred to earlier

if we seek to resolve this within the army

by making people feel uneasy so they won’t come, or will be punished at the lower ranks

it’s really not…

human history shows that things do not change in this manner

and that this is not what’s going to end the military control

even if Daniel would have gone all the way and said no

the military control over Hebron would not have ended

and i think that the question we ought to ask ourselves is

for each one of us, what is their own responsibility?

so I return the question back to you

following on the previous couple of questions

I’d like to ask the organization and specifically those

who took testimonies from the massacre that took place in Gaza

and I’d also like to ask whether you are taking responsibility?

those people who are active in the organization

from reading of the testimonies

or more precisely, those stories

removed of facts, removed of names

dates, places, chain of command,

names of Palestinians

from reading these stories

it seems as though crimes clearly took place

and a considerable number of which may be regarded as war crimes

I would like to know why do you choose

to conceal the facts

to cover up the crimes

and even to tamper with evidence

and why don’t you go to the authorities?

sorry, I will only add that if you say that

if you will not participate in protecting these criminals

you will not receive any more testimonies

then this is not a valid argument

since you yourselves are participating in such a crime

ok, just in order to explain the position of Breaking the Silence

and also so that it won’t be a back and forth discussion

about Gaza and in general, also Hebron

first of all a crime of war

and the whole discussion is a legal discourse

thanks. this is a legal discourse

meaning a crime of war is not something a civilian can decide on

but something that the authorities decide on

Breaking the Silence chose to take a stand

that we know is a controversial one and aware of its problems

that we act as a journalistic organization

also on the technical level

we have a journalistic status

it means, for example, that soldiers are not allowed to talk to us

since they’re not allowed to talk to journalists

so they make another offence when approaching us

and when they expose themselves they also make this offence

sorry..

along with that we decided that our political activity

and we certainly see Breaking the Silence as having a political activity

our political activity of diseminating information is a journalistic activity

and as much as it is possible to ask every journalist

whether they are not complicit in crime

when they receive a testimony from a senior political source

or from a senior military source

every journalist speaking to someone who remains anonoymous

is actually complicit in crime

we took a decision that this is the best way to get the information outside

but there is also a second part to this answer

since we have to explain why we took this decision

we, and again, coming from our political perspective

that we understand others may disagree with

we don’t know which authority concerns us

when such a thing is mentioned

for example, there are people sitting on stage here

testifying for themsleves

if the military investigation uniit would have liked to sit here they would have

if the state wanted to be sitting here it would have

it doesn’t want to sit here

since they understand that actually judging us is judging themselves and the system

so this is for the Israeli authorities

as for the international authorities

first of all we don’t see it as something that’s necessarily positive

neither positive nor negative

it’s simply stepping out of the country

but also there, there is no technical place that one could go to

it’s not that the court in Hague sits there

and says: “if we only had these Breaking the Silence testimonies, we would have been able to wrap up the whole case”

so technically there’s nothing really to be done with that

it sounds like a very practical claim

until you start disintegrating it and technically

there isn’t much to be done in the legal arena

furthermore, we know that in the legal arena

there have been many attempts and from our political perspective they have failed

and this is why

we are aware of these issues

i’d also like to say about things that have been said

which is universally true, that rookie soldiers have

less of a criminal responsibility than commanders

we carry a criminal liability

these specific persons expose it

and for exposing it they know it and understand it

we understand it daily

all the Breaking the Silence people who speak in public

we understand that we have criminal liability

and some of us, I can say for myself, will be happy if they come and try me

I think it’s important to be said

so in a nutshell, when you build the authority that will try me

I will also come with Michael

seriously, I say it in jest but according to international law

according to my moral values

I committed crimes and would be happy that the political situation will allow me to pay the price

it is irrelevant today

Related Links

Defence for Children International – Palestine
Israel breaks silence over army abuses

Posted on

Beyond the Red Lines

This week, the @IsraelinIreland twitter from the Israeli Consulate in Ireland, was served a public dressing down by the Israeli Foreign Minister (@IsraelMFA) for savage attacks on Palestinian Israeli MK Haneen Zoabi while she visited Ireland. As well, the Deputy Ambassador at the Israeli Irish Consulate, Nurit Tinari-Modai, had published a lengthy attack on Haneen in the Irish Times. In Haaretz, the Israeli FM ordained:

Over the last few weeks, there have been a few embarrassing moments caused by tweets and Facebook posts made by Israeli diplomats. For example, the Israeli embassy in Dublin used its twitter account to attack MK Hanin Zoabi, during a recent visit to Ireland.

Zoabi gave a few lectures, and granted interviews to Irish media outlets, in which she claimed that Israel is a racist, undemocratic state. Following publication of her comments, the Israeli Embassy in Dublin responded with three tweets, that criticized MK Zoabi, despite the fact that she is an elected official.

“This particular MK consorted on #MaviMarmara with IHH jihadists who sang of killing Jews, who are sworn to destroy #Israel #Zoabi,” read one of the tweets.

A second tweet included a link to a YouTube in which Zoabi spoke about the Mavi Marmara raid alongside armed Turkish activists, “And she’s still in Parliament! MK Haneen #Zoabi with armed #IHH jihadists on #MaviMarmara 2010 youtube.com/watch?v=S0-d9v”

The third called for inquiries into Zoabi’s relatives in various positions of government. “If you hear MK #Zoabi tonight #Dublin: ask her re her 2 uncles, 1 a Supreme Court judge, 1 a dep Min of Health + Nazareth mayor!”

@IsraelinIreland has also displayed racism toward Irish citizens:

Cantankerous and bullying, @IsraelinIsrael strayed over the vaunted red lines into self-delegitimisation of Israel.

Earlier this week, Yoram Murad, head of the Foreign Ministry’s Digitial Diplomacy Department sent a message to Israeli diplomats both in the country and abroad, entitled, “What is the difference between a press briefing and a tweet?” The answer was made clear in first line of the message “As far as you’re concerned, there is no difference,” wrote Murad.

The Haaretz story by Barak Ravid, yet with a shrill tenor which seems to ululate as direct channelling from the Israeli FM itself, broadly exaggerates Israel’s inexperience with social media:

‘Contrary to the United States’ State Department, where Twitter and Facebook use is already highly institutionalized, the Israeli Foreign Ministry’s use of social media is still in its infancy.’

In late 2008, David Saranga (@DavidSaranga), then at the Israeli Consulate in New York, conducted the first government to world twitter conference.

Saranga, with a web presence at www.israelfm.org, was described in the Jewish Chronicle in May 2008 as “The man whose campaigns are rebranding Israel.”

In July 2007, Professor John H. Brown of Georgetown University in his article Public Diplomacy Goes ‘Pubic’ of the launch of Saranga’s rebranding strategy in May that year:

But until recently modern-world governments — unlike advertising agencies peddling their goods — were reluctant to sell openly their main product (themselves and the nations they represent) through images of the human flesh exposed at various levels of nudity. Now, however, the body beautiful of their citizens is being openly celebrated by states seeking to foster a more positive image of themselves.

True, twentieth-century totalitarian films and photographs glorified, in their absolutist and absurdist ways, the strength and muscularity of (particularly male) athletes and soldiers, but the intended effect of these images, I would suggest, was not erotic arousal aimed at improving a government’s image overseas, but rather domination and intimidation, some would say of a sado-masochistic nature, directed at obtaining total control of society in the homeland. Orwell’s Oceania did not welcome the erotic.

Israel and the Birth of Pubic Diplomacy

It would not do violence to history to suggest that this new branch of public diplomacy — allow me to call it pubic diplomacy, a term I hope will offend no one — began on Tuesday, May 19, 2007 at 9:00 pm, with a three-hour reception, hosted by Maxim, a men’s magazine, and Gal Gadot, Miss Israel 2004 — together with the Consulate General of Israel in New York — that took place at the Marquee at 289 Tenth Avenue, NYC.

The purpose of the event was to “celebrate the Maxim Magazine July 2007 feature, ‘women of the Israeli Defense Forces.'” The invitation was adorned by a color photograph of the luscious, dark-haired Ms. Gadot herself (a former army fitness instructor) in a bikini and high heels, lying on her back on the ledge of a terrace overlooking Tel Aviv, with the Mediterranean, dimly lit by sunlight, over the horizon. This eye-catching photo was published by the New York Post; and Ms. Gadot, who, according to Wikipedia, is in a relationship with Hebrew rapper Mike Blitz, subsequently appeared on major American television channels, gently and sympathetically interviewed by U.S. newscasters.

Israeli diplomats, representatives of a country that has witnessed extensive debate on how to improve its public diplomacy (the word is now used repeatedly in the Israeli press) in the wake of the Second Lebanon War, justified the photo spread of young Israeli women warriors in Maxim’s (“a beer and babes” magazine with 2.5 million readers appealing to young males) amidst accusations back in the Holy Land (but not, significantly, among the American mainstream media) that the pics of the scantily-clad military ladies were pornographic, treated women as objects, and promoted sex tourism. Arye Mekel, Consul-General of Israel in New York, quoted in the Israel News Agency (June 24), retorted that:

the pictures aren’t anything you wouldn’t see at a pool or a beach. Israel is always mentioned in the context of wars and violence. We want to show there is a normal life. Among the beautiful things [sic] we have are our women. We came there from 120 countries. Anytime you have a mix from any continents, you get very beautiful people. We don’t see having beautiful women as a problem.

Joel Leyden of the Israel News Agency (June 24) quotes David Saranga, Israel’s Consul For Media And Public Affairs at its New York Consulate, as saying that “[w]e found that Israel’s image among men aged 18-38 is lacking … so we thought we’d approach them with an image they’d find appealing.” Leydeen adds that, according to Saranga, “the beautiful models in Israel were a ‘Trojan horse’ to present Israel as a modern country with nice beaches and pretty women. ‘Many Americans don’t even know we have beaches,’ he said.”

Aljazeera.com, quoted by Prof. Brown, commented:

One interesting fact is that all the outrage in Israel is focused on the idea of using women as sex objects to promote tourism. But what’s more shocking is that sex here is not just being used to “improve” Israel’s image, but also to promote Zionism and gloss over the bitter realities of Israel’s occupation and apartheid.

Brand Israel, however, was envisaged and compiled back in 2005.

According to the Jewish Daily Forward, in 2005 The Israeli Foreign Ministry, the Prime Minister’s Office and the Finance Ministry concluded three years of consultation with American marketing executives and launched “Brand Israel,” a campaign to “re-brand” the country’s image to appear “relevant and modern” instead of militaristic and religious.

Israeli government social media integration was progressive. The GIYUS Megaphone software became operational during Israel’s war on South Lebanon in 2006, operating through RSS and enabling instant action alerts to be transmitted to users. GIYUS was discontinued in 2011.

In March 2009, Saranga was debriefed by the Diva Marketing Blog after his ground-breaking December 2008 twitter conference:

David Saranga: We have been involved in online work for some time, through our blogs (isRraelli and IsraelPolitik) and our presence on MySpace and Facebook. After reading about Twitter, we felt that the tool held a lot of potential for communicating with people online.

Firstly, we can “focus” on one person, but many people can tune in as well. This way, even when we are answering one person, other people are still taking part.

Secondly, Twitter is a site where people are increasingly going to talk, so we wanted to join the conversation where it was happening.

Toby/Diva Marketing: How did you achieve buy-in from the consulate and other stake holders?

David Saranga: The diplomatic staff here has really come to understand the value of web-based content and of social media. We told them how important a presence on Twitter could be, and they were hooked.

Also in May 2008, the Jewish Chronicle recorded:

Saranga believes the real results of his campaign will not be seen for years. “Rebranding a country can take 20 years or more. It involves more than just generating more positive stories about Israel. The process has to be internalised and integrated, too. Israelis must share in and believe in what we promote, and all consulates must ultimately communicate one unified message.”

To this end, international focus groups co-ordinated by the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Tzipi Livni, are now being undertaken in 13 countries. Three potential messages, brainstormed by an elite group of international branding experts, Israeli diplomats and PR agencies, are being tested to determine one global message for Israel. The results of the research will focus hasbara efforts in countries considered of greatest strategic importance, and where negative views of Israel are most severe, in particular in Europe. Research is being undertaken on how it can be applied in the UK.

In 2009, the Israeli Government officially expanded its hasbara operations in the blogosphere, enlisting volunteers:

The Immigrant Absorption Ministry announced on Sunday it was setting up an “army of bloggers,” to be made up of Israelis who speak a second language, to represent Israel in “anti-Zionist blogs” in English, French, Spanish and German.

Saranga has attended several Reut events and his social media strategy dovetails neatly with the Reut Institute plan to establish network hubs throughout the globe, to be linked up and coordinated ultimately from and for Israel with the aim of fighting ‘delegitimization’ perceived as damage from the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign and based on the premise ‘It takes a network to fight a network’.

From Reut’s over-optimistically-titled 2011: The Year We Punched Back on the Assault on Israel’s Legitimacy:

Cultivating a network requires Israel and its allies to share a ‘common consciousness,’which can take the form of a shared goal, cause, or threat, and to mobilize around this shared understanding. Indeed, the GOI and Israeli and Jewish world organizations coalesced in identifying this assault on Israel as a top priority issue, tangibly manifested in structural changes and budget increases:

Hubs have been developed most fully now in Los Angeles, Orange County, London, the San Francisco Bay Area, South Africa and most recently, Toronto (a report is due from Reut on the Toronto hub soon). Reut also is targeting of late Spanish speaking communities. A tripartite syncretised identity and networking model for integration and mobilisation of Israeli expats in the Jewish diaspora with one of the aims strengthening and directing support back toward Israel is underway. The Israel Action Network(IAN) has been formed to facilitate and network hubs in North America.

Strengthening our network’s ‘hubs’ and ‘catalysts’ require systematically creating ‘meeting points.’Such meetings enhance the capabilities of pro-Israel activists in various global hubs by providing opportunities for them to exchange information, coordinate efforts, and generate a sense ofurgency about the need to fight Israel’s delegitimization. In addition, ‘meeting points’ enhance the connectivity of the network, facilitating its integration, helping shape a common language and shared guidelines, and enabling the creation of a flat and flexible structure.

Early this year, the National Union of Israeli Students (NUIS) became a full-time partner in “the Israeli government’s efforts to spread its propaganda online and on college campuses around the world”.

NUIS has launched a program to pay Israeli university students $2,000 to spread pro-Israel propaganda online for 5 hours per week from the “comfort of home.”

The union is also partnering with Israel’s Jewish Agency to send Israeli students as missionaries to spread propaganda in other countries, for which they will also receive a stipend.

This active recruitment of Israeli students is part of Israel’s orchestrated effort to suppress the Palestinian solidarity movement under the guise of combating “delegitimization” of Israel and anti-Semitism.

The involvement of the official Israeli student union as well as Haifa University, Tel Aviv University, Ben-Gurion University and Sapir College in these state propaganda programs will likely bolster Palestinian calls for the international boycott of Israeli academic institutions.

The flaws and vulnerabilities of the overall labyrinthine structure are manifold, and I shall not deal with them here, except to note that people move toward and commit to justice as a useful common goal – justice for all benefits us all. A lack of justice for all conversely harms us all. When an artificial structure within ‘red lines’ is developed to subvert justice for all, it generally has a limited expiry date and collapses in a mathematically catastrophical way under the weight of its own contradictions. In view of 7 years development from 2005 to a sophisticated, networked array today, Israel’s multi-pronged social media strategy cannot be described as ‘in its infancy’.

Through singling itself out through daily human rights abuses, war crimes, ultra-racism, violence and brutal oppression, Israel continues to delegitimise itself and poison its brand.

The greatest enemy of injustice is a mirror.

Related Links

Half-naked soldiers: Israel’s latest propaganda campaign
Tell us, how many Arabs are too many? “How many human souls of an ethnicity inconvenient to your ideology are intolerable for you? Please put a number on it, I demand you do, so that we can better define the extent of your racism.”
Lies and Hysteria in the Campaign Against BDS – BDS is biting
Plastic, oestrogen, or the land kicking back?
THE PLACE OF PUBLIC DIPLOMACY IN THE ASYMMETRIC MEDIA CONFLICT: THE “HASBARA EXAMPLE” IN THE HEZBOLLAH –ISRAEL MEDIA WAR

Posted on

Haneen Zoabi Responds to the Hasbara Bile of Nurit Tinari-Modai

Is this normal behaviour for other countries? Last week in the Irish media, the Deputy Ambassador of Israel in Ireland, Nurit Tinari-Modai, perniciously attacked with racist prevarications and insults Palestinian Israeli MK Haneen Zoabi during her visit to Ireland.

Haneen has responded to Modai, and her reply is worth reprinting in full:

‘Sir, – Deputy Israeli ambassador to Ireland Nurit Modai (August 10th) is correct that it is unusual to for an embassy to comment on the activities of an MP. Alas, it is all too usual when Israel is involved. Indeed, when it comes to Israel, the unusual routinely becomes the norm: laws that discriminate against the 18 per cent of its citizens who are Palestinian; state-instigated incitement against these citizens; prioritising one demographic group over another in the name of religion; all are “normal” in Israel.

Of course, she simply ignored the facts contained in the article about me, preferring to avoid such unwinnable arguments. She has nothing to say regarding the 30-plus laws which discriminate against Palestinian citizens in all areas: confiscation of land, land use, housing licenses, areas of residency, education laws which make it impossible to learn our Palestinian history and literature, publicly funded institutions being prohibited from commemorating Al Nakba (the Zionist expulsion of 85 per cent of the indigenous Palestinians from their homeland to forcibly create the Israeli state), etc.

There is even a classical apartheid law (the 2011 Admission Committees Law) which makes it de facto legal for 578 community villages to refuse Palestinian citizens residency on the basis of unsuitability for the “social fabric of the community”.

More generally, the average income of a Jewish family is three times more than for a Palestinian family in Israel, 50 per cent of us live under the poverty line, and we only make up 7.9 per cent of university students.

In Israel we Palestinians must deny our national identity; otherwise we will become “disloyal” citizens, “traitors”. We are “betraying” the state by struggling against racism and discrimination, because we must accept the fact that this is a “Jewish state”, created to privilege its Jewish citizens.

My uncle, whom deputy ambassador felt the need to drag into the debate, didn’t challenge any of this; thus, he became one of the “good Arabs” which Israel uses as propaganda cover. But it is worth pointing out that he is only one of two Palestinian citizens to have served on the Supreme Court since 1948, while more than 80 Jewish citizens have served in that time. My family’s participation in the political life of Israel proves nothing other than that we have used what limited democratic outlets are available to us to advance the cause of our people.

Indeed, Israel could afford a veneer of “democracy” towards previous generations of Palestinian citizens because, like my uncle, they never challenged their position in society. Generally speaking, a whole generation acted as such, out of fear and sense of weakness and defeat. These fears were well founded; until 1966 Palestinian citizens lived under military rule, similar to what our people in the Occupied Territories now experience. Things have changed, however, as the majority of my generation, (the fourth generation after Al Nakba), decided to reject the inherent racism and discrimination of the state towards them and organise to defeat these deficits of democracy.

The embassy also attempted to portray the “Jewish” nature of the state as akin to the “Irish” nature of Ireland. This false comparison, however, merely proves the points I make; they refuse to recognise that definition is entirely exclusivist in nature – it is based on a specific ethno-religious grouping, and thus excludes the entirety of the Palestinian and other non-Jewish citizens from the definition of the state, making the full realisation of their rights an impossibility.

The deputy ambassador has no answer for this, so she attempts to play the “religious card” by presenting false statistics regarding Christians – once again denying our Palestinian identity by dividing us into religions. We are not merely Christians or Muslims, nor are we “Israeli Arabs”, we are Palestinian citizens of Israel and we are struggling for our full national and equal rights, which means to have a democratic state for all its citizens. – Yours, etc,

HANEEN ZOABI, MK,

Knesset,

Kiryat Ben Gurion,

Jerusalem, Israel.’

Below, Haneen challenges the apartheid Israeli entity’s practices during her visit to Dublin.

And in the following vid, Haneen presents the case of Palestinian people in debate with representatives of racist settlers, liberal zionists and a member of the J14 movement.

Zoe Lawlor has kindly permitted her comment on Nurit Tinai-Modai’s chastisement of Haneen Zoabi, which was submitted and not published in the Irish Times, to be published here:

The very fact that the Deputy Ambassador of Israel wrote to the Irish Times to castigate Palestinian parliamentarian Haneen Zoabi underscores Ms Zoabi’s assertion that she is treated not as “a second class citizen” but as “an enemy, a strategic threat” by that state.

I don’t recall letters from the Deputy Ambassador condemning other Knesset members such as those who recently described African migrants as a “cancer” or indeed visitor to Ireland MK Rivlin who had previously stated, contrary to international law, “Jerusalem is the capital of Israel”.

That Ms. Modai describes the illegal, immoral siege of Gaza as “necessary” is telling and perfectly encapsulates Israel’s brutal oppression of the Palestinian people. Israel a democracy? Not for all its citizens.

Related Links

Israel’s reaction to EU customs list of non-eligible locations

Palestine / Israel Links

Other Links

Leader Of Anti-Semitic Party In Hungary Discovers He’s Jewish

Australia Links

Love letter from Australia’s reptilian politicians to asylum seekers largely created through US dirty wars in which Australia is complicit: “Don’t even think about taking a boat to escape the consequences of our grovelling warmongering partnership with the US, because we’ll lock you up offshore for the term of your natural lives”.