Since a delightful presentiment from Lee Rhiannon on last night’s Q&A, parts of Archbishop Desmond Tutu’s letter of support and solidarity to Marrickville Council have surfaced. The letter will be presented to Council tonight. Marrickville Council has the admirable fortitude to embrace human rights and justice for Palestinians.
“Sometimes taking a public stand for what is ethical and right brings costs, but social justice on a local or global scale requires faith and courage,” wrote Archbishop Tutu.
“I want to pay my respects to you and your fellow Councilors in Marrickville for taking a stand to isolate the Israeli state, and before that for offering practical solidarity to our sisters and brothers under occupation in the Holy City of Bethlehem.
“International Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions against the Apartheid regime, combined with the mass struggle inside South Africa, led to our victory.”.
Mayor Fiona Byrne and Councillors respond:
“I’m honoured to receive this endorsement from Nobel Peace Prize Laureate, Archbishop Desmond Tutu,” Mayor Byrne said. “Desmond Tutu’s courageous stand against Apartheid in South Africa and ongoing advocacy for peace and human rights is an inspiration to us all. Palestinian civil society has called for support for the Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions campaign to highlight the struggle of the Palestinian people for basic human rights. I am proud that Marrickville Council was able to support and highlight the human rights violations suffered by many Palestinian people,” Mayor Byrne said.
“We are humbled and inspired by this expression of support from Archbishop Desmond Tutu,” said Councillors Kontellis, Thanos and Peters, who along with Mayor Byrne maintained their support for the BDS despite intense media pressure.
The Nobel peace prize recipient and critic of Israel wrote that he wanted to extend his respects to the mayor, Fiona Byrne, and her fellow councillors ”for taking a stand to isolate the Israeli state”.
”We in South Africa, who both suffered apartheid and defeated it, have the moral right and responsibility to name and shame institutionalised separation, exclusion, and domination by one ethnic group over others,” Archbishop Tutu said in the letter, which will be formally presented to Cr Byrne tonight.
”Sometimes taking a public stand for what is ethical and right brings costs, but social justice on a local or global scale requires faith and courage.”
Jewish groups have condemned Nobel peace prize winner Archbishop Desmond Tutu for congratulating Sydney’s Marrickville Council on its now abandoned boycott of Israel.
….
The chief executive of the New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies, Vic Alhadeff, says Archbishop Tutu has a long history of such comments.
“This one is merely another in a consistent line of outrageous comments in terms of the conflict,” Mr Alhadeff said.
Yet Alhadeff was associated according to a deleted, cached and now screen-shot post from the blog of the Inner West Jewish Community and Friends Peace Alliance, ‘a local grassroots group which formed as a response to the December 14 2010 resolution by Marrickville Council to boycott Israel’ with an aim to use the scuttling of the first Australian Council initiative to warn local government off support of BDS.
We think it is extremely important to ensure that this first local government attempting to implement the boycott will be convinced by their constituents and by intelligent public opinion to reconsider and recast their boycott decision. The March state election is giving candidates and voters the opportunity to consider what an Israel boycott means, and to ask questions such as whether local or state governments should be deciding foreign policy.
We have plans for some carefully targeted media coverage and advertising in relation to the election. These strategies are expensive, but we believe they will be successful. We have been fortunate to have ongoing help and advice from very capable professionals. Also, we have among our own numbers people who are deeply involved in the Jewish community, and we are in frequent communication with Vic Alhadeff and Yair Miller from the Jewish Board of Deputies as well as Peter Wertheim from the Executive Council of Australian Jewry.
We need to raise approximately $12,000 in the next two-three weeks to carry out the activities that we believe will make a decisive difference. All the professional work that is being done for the campaign has been donated pro bono, but there are unavoidable advertising and research costs we will need to pay.’
…
If you would like to contribute to the success of this campaign, please donate what you can. Please also pass this information on quietly to like-minded friends.
Following an exceeding dirty campaign against Palestinian people’s human rights of push polls, electoral poster vandalisation with racist graffiti, near complete media blackout of Palestinian voices, newly elected NSW Premier Barry O’Farrell threatening to ‘sack’ the Council for its support of BDS and death threats to Councillors, the Marrickville Council stuck to the principles of BDS in its final motion without implementing a boycott.
According to the Sydney Morning Herald, Vic Alhadeff said his ‘organisation had no knowledge of the poster campaign, or the phone survey, until afterwards’.
The solidarity of human rights icon and anti-apartheidist Archbishop Desmond Tutu is a wonderful accolade for Marrickville Council and the community which supported their principled struggle for justice for Palestinians through boycott, divestment and sanctions. Congratulations to the courageous Councillors from Marrickville who have set an example which all people of conscience and compassion can applaud. Poll: 77% of Israelis oppose going back to pre-’67 lines
While evidence that the Syrian regime directly organized the demonstrations is scant to non-existent, the regime clearly enabled the demonstrators to reach the fence by neglecting to repel them with its own troops. Not only does this fact fail to excuse Israel’s wanton killing, it highlights the irony of Israel and its allies condemning the Syrian regime for its brutal repression of Syrian citizens rising up against it (of course, the whole world should deplore Assad’s draconian rule), while at the same time demanding that the regime repress the Palestinian refugees who are protesting for their own internationally recognized rights.
77% of Israelis would rather stay expansionist and reject peace – they ‘oppose returning to pre-1967 lines even if it would lead to a peace agreement and declarations by Arab states of an end to their conflict with Israel’ … 82% considered security concerns more important than a peace deal.
Saudi Arabia Links
petro-dollar counter-revolution Saudi Arabia’s array of bribes to makes its inhabitants forget that they’re living under the whip of nut-job monarchs.
.
‘Black is also expected to speak on the roiling issue of BDS, the anti-Israel Boycott, Disinvestment and Sanction movement. The BDS coalition of left-wing Jewish groups and Arab economic jihadis, traces its direct roots to the aggressive adoption of Hitler’s anti-Jewish boycott by Arabs in Palestine during the Holocaust.’
‘I found the viewpoint expressed overlooking settled history. Arabs have been mass murdering Jews in Palestine since the Balfour Declaration. The pogroms of 1920 and 1921 saw Arabs in well-documented internationally condemned orgies of death including mass battering skulls, hatchet attacks and mutilations. British commission responded but did not stem the violence. Student journalists should check it out. In 1929, because Jews sat down at the Wailing Wall while praying instead of remaining in a standing position, Arabs mercilessly massacred Jews with knives, swords, clubs and guns. In Hebron, eyes were poked out, babies cut in half, one man was crucified, another had his brains extracted and used for sport, one was cut open and his papers burned, one had his head was baked in an oven, Torahs burned–all for sitting down during prayer–all in a globally documented massacre. There have been many more attacks. Student journalists should check it out.
Does the BDS movement own up to this enormous record of mass murder and Torah desecration? Can BDS assure the world that they succeed and have their way, that Jews will no longer be mass murdered merely because they sat down during prayer?’
edwin black
http://www.edwinblack.com/
Black is poisoning the well, creating a lurid illusion that BDS, which was initiated by Palestinian civil society in 2005 because all other methods have failed to restrain the crimes against humanity continuously perpetrated by Israel, is retrospectively guilty of events which if they are factual, occurred nearly 80 years ago. Over the top and out the window. What’s this guy on?
More from the erudite Edwin:
‘If all Arabs want peace, it only takes a handshake and a pen to make it happen. Sadat and King Hussein proved that. Until that courageous moment occurs, all the BDS agitation,including BDS against peacemakers, is just in furtherance of the dark tendency of history to make us perpetuate and repeat all prior unhappiness. Don’t be fooled students. Peace has a chance if you give peace a chance. Good bye Harpo and all those who think BDS is an answer. Better to invest in mutual peace then endless economic jihad.
edwin’
So BDS makes the zionists continue their genocide of Palestinians. And pigs fly because BDS makes them.
‘On the opening night international panel discussion scheduled for Saturday, June 11, Black will speak on the topic “Who is a Friend of Israel?” The much anticipated panel of international figures is expected to confront the BDS issue head on, with Black giving the historical perspective as it applies to today’s Arab Spring.’
Let’s hope there’s folks present to ask suitable questions in response.
Other Limmud-Oz speakers who will ‘deal’ with BDS are :
“2. ‘Beyond the Pale: Disagreeing about Israel’ with Tommy Sterling, Larry Stillman and Mark Baker. 3. ‘From BDS to Burqas! Grassroots Community Action’ with Elaine Black, Shirlee Finn, Danny
Kidron, Gael Kennedy and Sergio Redegalli. 4. ‘BDS Movement, Councils, and the art of conversation’ with Donna Jacobs Sife, Lyndall Katz, Gael
Kennedy and David Knoll. 5. ‘Is Israel an apartheid state?’ with Andrew Markus. 6. ‘Narrative Wars: A Brief History of an Enduring Conflict’ with Mark Baker.”
“Criticism of Israel or the policies of its government similar to that levelled against any other country is entirely acceptable, and is an everyday occurrence within Israel itself. However, the Executive of Limmud-Oz in Sydney believes that the BDS campaign is an attack on Israel’s basic legitimacy and harms the Jewish people as a whole, as does the singling out of Israel for unjust criticism.
Contrary to the BDS call for a cultural boycott of Israel, Limmud-Oz supports engagement with Israeli academic and artistic institutions and we have a number of their representatives involved in Limmud-Oz this year. BDS therefore undermines this crucial aspect of Limmud-Oz.
Limmud-Oz does not deny that proponents of BDS have the right to express their views to whomever they like. But that right does not impose an obligation on us to provide them with a space to do so.
This is not about censorship, nor are we seeking to stifle dissenting views. Limmud-Oz is proud of the principles of pluralism and inclusiveness which guide us and Limmuds around the world.”
‘Limmud-Oz, the Australian arm of the global festival of Jewish learning, is at the centre of controversy after organisers banned two presenters who “publicly advocate a total boycott against Israel” and a major donor threatened to withdraw funding.
The executive of Limmud-Oz released a statement last week saying it believes that the Boycott, Divestment & Sanctions (BDS) campaign is “an attack on Israel’s basic legitimacy and harms the Jewish people as a whole”.
Programme director Michael Misrachi confirmed that, as a result, Peter Slezak, a co-founder of Australian Independent Jewish Voices, and Vivienne Porzsolt, a spokeswoman for Jews Against The Occupation, were disinvited from the two-day festival in Sydney in mid-June.
Mr Slezak accused organisers of “moral and intellectual weakness” while Ms Porzsolt said the ban “smacks of excommunication”‘
…
But Mr Immerman defended the decision to drop the two BDS proponents. “In supporting BDS, these individuals advocate denying free speech to Israeli academics and performers, on whom we depend for Limmud-Oz, yet, ironically, claim this right for themselves.”
They may, however, attend the festival, he added. “Limmud-Oz remains a very broad tent – the programme includes and celebrates a wide diversity of opinions.”
The “boycott of the boycotters” prompted two other presenters to withdraw last week in protest.
“We abhor the idea of being associated with an event that bans ideas,” Jenny Green and Joel Nothman said in a letter to the Limmud executive.’
Considering Black’s odd reinterpretations of history and the misconception Mr. Immerman has about BDS as well, it’s most unfortunate that those who would provide a more informed and balanced view are censored from attending causing others to chose to cancel as a matter of principle.
‘On Saturday, a senior Palestinian official said Abbas has concluded that a statehood push at the U.N. would not advance the Palestinians’ cause.
Abbas’ initiative, he said, will be compromised by the fact that the Palestinians first have to seek support from the Security Council before going to the General Assembly, where the Palestinians are more confident of obtaining majority support.’
A member of the PLO negotiating team, however, denied the report saying some of the world’s most important international lawyers are backing the initiative and the Palestinians are hopeful they will succeed.
“President Abbas knows getting recognition will be difficult, which is something quite different,” the official said on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on the record.
Here comes Abass’s sellout of Palestinians right of return? Ya’alon’s view:
‘Ya’alon said that there were “paradigm differences between the two sides.” He stated that while Abbas had expressed willingness to go to Paris, the PA president had not agreed to begin negotiations with Israel.
“We are ready to go to the table. We have been waiting for Abu Mazen [Abbas] for two years,” Ya’alon told Channel 2.’
Maybe it’s posturing – the Israelis don’t sound keen, despite the overly generous starting point.
Ya’alon says:
‘that a unilateral declaration of Palestinian statehood in the UN General Assembly would not lead to Israel’s isolation or have any concrete effect on the country. ‘
Then what’s the problem in a Palestinian state being declared?
Major ziotroll effort on Ya’alon’s part? Danny Danon’s NYTimes piece and the Legal Forum of Israel’s complementary advices about Israel’s annexation options might be very tempting to the expansionist Israelis.
“Such unilateral action by the Palestinians could give rise to reciprocal initiatives in the Israeli Parliament (Knesset) which could include proposed legislation to declare Israel’s sovereignty over extensive parts of Judea and Samaria, if and when the Palestinians carry out their unilateral action.”
‘The absence of any workable plan, he said, will leave Israel in a dangerous and weak situation if the Palestinians push for UN recognition of a state later this year.’
There’s legal dispute about whether Res 377, which is the Uniting for Peace resolution would be applicable in the case of recognising a state. It is used to resolve the peace not recognise states – yes, Israel is conducting a military occupation of Palestinians, but as long as Israel whines deceitfully that they are ‘willing to negotiate’ why, firstly would Res 377 be invoked, secondly, how could res 377 be used to form a state – that is not its role.
There are arguments for both positions. I tend to think that there will be no use of res 377 in this case, but Israel will use the situation to bleat victim again. I am of course willing to be persuaded, but then again, do we really think the sort of Palestinian ‘state’ which is on the table is actually a viable, sovereign state? As Grinstein of the Reut Institute says:
‘Despite Obama’s speeches, the diplomatic process will remain at a dead end as the moment of decision in September approaches. Then the United States will have another opportunity to do the right thing: to ensure that the establishment of a Palestinian state conforms to Israel’s needs.’
Neither Danny Danon in his NY Times article nor the Legal Forum of Israel on the face of it *want* Abass to declare a state – while the Reut Institute (hasbara central) does – yet if Israel refuses to attend the OH NO not more peas talks in Paris, Abass seems to be going to proceed with the declaration – yet this will be blocked by US veto, but may give Israel the excuse, even if it is broached, to commence annexation of all lands except for where Palestinians are living at present – the formalisation of discontinuous powerless bantustans, leaving Palestinian people without rights, presenting an opportunity to ethnically cleanse Palestinians from Israel also – but of course, making Israel’s position completely untenable, except in Ya’alon’s, and the Reut Institute’s eyes.
‘Grinstein hopes that UN recognition will set rolling a bandwagon that limits any Palestinian state to precisely the kind of demilitarized bantustan under overall Israeli control that will “solve” Israel’s legitimacy and diplomatic problems while marginalizing Palestinian rights, especially refugee rights.’
‘Since the Hamas victory in the January 2006 elections, there is not and cannot be a Palestinian partner to such a diplomatic process. On the one hand, a Palestine that includes Hamas, which refuses to recognize Israel and existing agreements, cannot be a partner to negotiations on a final-status agreement. On the other hand, without Hamas, the Palestinian system lacks internal legitimacy, which prevents a historic concession. That’s why all the calls out of Washington, Brussels and Jerusalem for a renewal of talks between Israel and the Palestinians are hollow, and the negotiations that were conducted during the Annapolis process had no chance of success in the first place. ‘
The last paragraph is the most sinister:
”Despite Obama’s speeches, the diplomatic process will remain at a dead end as the moment of decision in September approaches. Then the United States will have another opportunity to do the right thing: to ensure that the establishment of a Palestinian state conforms to Israel’s needs.’
‘In the Palestinian arena, we continued to meet with members of the political, diplomatic, and security establishment, and also key figures of influence from other arenas. Of particular note, we have begun the process of mapping the vast and complex political-diplomatic terrain ahead of the expected September UN General Assembly declaration of an independent Palestinian state, and the likely Durban III conference taking in New York at the same time. ‘
What Res 377 MIGHT be used for, though, is in regard to Israel’s war crimes in Gaza. I’ve written previously about this here.
Significantly, this issue also comes up in September, so Grinstein is doubtless correct when he has determined the diplomatic process will remain at a dead end till near September.
I also wrote about Professor Francis Boyle’s interpretation of the use of 377 here.
‘The statement emphasizes that however one feels about the issue of diplomatic recognition of a Palestinian “state,” the campaign to achieve such recognition cannot stand as a substitute for the global struggle for Palestinian rights in all their aspects. Here are some key passages with highlighting added:
” This September will mark the 20th anniversary of the start of the Israeli-Palestinian “peace process” that is widely recognized as a total failure, by any objective standard. This sham process has served as a cover for Israel’s intensive colonization of Palestinian lands, continued denial of Palestinian basic rights, and gradual ethnic cleaning of Palestinians, while simultaneously giving a false impression of peacemaking. In this context, the BNC welcomes the recognition of a great majority of states around the world that the Palestinian right to statehood and freedom from Israeli occupation are long overdue and should no longer to be held hostage to fanatically biased US “diplomacy” in defense of Israeli expansionism. However, recognition of Palestinian statehood is clearly insufficient, on its own, in bringing about a real end to Israel’s occupation and colonial rule. Neither will it end Israel’s decades-old system of legalized racial discrimination, which fits the UN definition of apartheid, or allow the millions of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes of origin from which they were violently uprooted and exiled.
Diplomatic recognition must result in protection of the inalienable right to self-determination of the entire Palestinian people represented by a democratized and inclusive PLO that represents not just Palestinians under occupation, but also the the exiled refugees, the majority of the Palestinian people, as well as the discriminated citizens of Israel.. For it to go beyond symbolism, this recognition must be a prelude to effective and sustained sanctions against Israel aimed at bringing about its full compliance with its obligations under international law. As shown in the struggle to end apartheid in South Africa, as well as in the current struggles for freedom and justice in the Arab region, world governments do not turn against a patently illegal and immoral regime of oppression simply on ethical grounds; economic interests and hegemonic power dynamics are far weightier in their considerations.”
The statement continues:
” The key lesson learned from South Africa is that, in order for world governments to end their complicity with Israel’s grave and persistent violations of human rights and international law, they must be compelled to do so through mass, well organized grassroots pressure by social movements and other components of civil society. In this context, BDS has proven to be the most potent and promising strategy of international solidarity with the Palestinian people in our struggle for self determination, freedom, justice and equality.
In light of the above, and inspired by the will and the power of the people which have given rise to the Arab spring, the BNC calls upon people of conscience and international solidarity groups to proceed with building a mass BDS movement in the US and elsewhere in the world’s most powerful countries before and after September. Only such a mass movement can ensure that whatever diplomatic recognition transpires at the UN in September on Palestinian statehood will advance the rights of the Palestinian people and raise the price of Israel’s occupation, colonialism and apartheid by further isolating it and those complicit in its crimes”.’
Channel 10 quoted sources close to Netanyahu as saying that Dagan had “gone crazy” and had “compromised state secrets” by speaking out against an Israeli attack on Iran.
Just-recently retired Mossad chief Meir Dagan, who had already come out publicly in favor of the Ofers a day earlier, wrote an op-ed on Israel’s leading Internet portal, YNET, saying that it’s not illegal to trade with Iran (technically false, practically speaking sometimes true, depending on the whims of the authorities) and that Iran isn’t even considered an “enemy country” (false, it’s specifically referred to as such in several laws, including one that bans anyone who visited it from running for Knesset for seven years). Then, to change the subject and get the Ofers off the front pages, he went on to say it would be “stupid” to attack Iran and expressed grave concerns as to the judgment of PM Netanyahu* and Defense Minister Ehud Barak**. In addition, Dagan also said that Israel should have accepted the Saudi (Arab League) peace proposal, but then said that once it became an Arab League proposal it became “verboten”. Doesn’t make a whole lot of sense, I know.
The Government could not support the part of Ms Bishop’s motion because it stated there was a “fraying of the traditionally bipartisan support amongst Australia’s political parties for the State of Israel”. This statement is false. Bipartisan support for the State of Israel is strong and undiminished. Israel is fully supported by the Government, and we are not aware of any fraying of support from the Opposition.
Government members today voted in favour of the following motion in Parliament today.
[The Parliament]
“(1) restates its support for the motion moved by the then Prime Minister and passed by this House on the sixtieth anniversary of the State of Israel, and in particular:
(a) acknowledges the unique relationship which exists between Australia and Israel, a bond highlighted by the commitment of both societies to the rights and liberty of our citizens and to cultural diversity;
(b) commends the State of Israel’s commitment to democracy, the rule of law and pluralism; and
(c) reiterates Australia’s commitment to Israel’s right to exist in peace and security, and our continued support for a peaceful two-state resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian issue. ”
The motion should have had the word ‘unique’ changed for ‘special’ so it more closely aligned with the US commensalist position. Australia, the US, Canada and Israel – all settler colonial entities in denial of their ongoing genocide of their indigenous peoples. Israel differs from the rest of course in its ‘cultural diversity’ because there are no equal rights under the law in Israel – non-jews are discriminated against by more than 30 laws. Can equality exist in the Jewish state? After 44 years of occupation: where is the Israeli Peace Camp?
Israeli peace activists do not need to dictate to the Palestinians how to run their resistance; they have their own work to do.
If they are truly worried about a one state solution, they need to organise and take to the streets to protest Netanyahu’s fatal blow to the two-state solution and to force their government to change its course.
After 44 years of occupation, what are they still waiting for?
We chose Professor Noam Chomsky for inspiring the convictions of millions about ways to achieve those universal human rights, which bolster peace with justice.
For more than 50 years he has been a world champion of freedom of speech, of the value of transparency in government and the need to challenge secrecy and censorship.
In his study of the political economy of human rights, he exposed state crimes, induced by US foreign policy, across South America, the Middle East and South East Asia.
With unfailing moral courage he has challenged abusive uses of power and the false claims made about democracy.
He has offended almost every establishment figure and institution: Chomsky is anathema to the Israeli government, was the only scientist or philosopher on the Nixon White House enemies list and the Soviet Union imposed a total ban on his works.
In his analyses of democracy and power he identifies the “manufacture of consent” by governments, corporations and the media.
Professor Chomsky has always argued that forces for change should be non violent.
The witnesses said that the settlers kicked the woman, who was only saved by a group of Palestinian passersby, adding that the settlers tried to ignite a bigger scuffle.
The army does not deny leaving the devices, but would not identify them and suggested they were left over after training exercises. But the area where they were found does not feature on an army map of designated training areas and the canisters appeared new and unweathered.
‘In light of these surrounding circumstances, including the failure of Israel to live up to its announced promise after the attack in 2010 to lift the blockade, it shocks our moral and legal sensibilities that the UN Secretary General should be using the authority of his office to urge member governments to prevent ships from joining Freedom Flotilla 2.’
But like in Hungary of 1920, so too in Israel of 2011, the spirit of the law is more important than the language, and everyone is clear on its purpose: to get rid of the Haredim and the Arabs. The state is the one that exempted them from mandatory military service and now wants to punish them for alleged “evasion.”
Americans see in Israel their own preferred reflection of themselves. They see a lone, devout and free people on the edge of a vast continent full of dusky, hostile natives. Like the European colonists who settled North America, the destiny of this free people is to build a “city on a hill” on virgin land, a beacon of freedom and civilisation in a tragic world.
Phil Monsour addressed protesters gathered outside in the mall: “We will not be silent over the continuing oppression of Palestine. We have a message to politicians, to condemn Israel over its aggression against the Palestinians.
The “Land of Israel” is a phantasm. Withdrawing from “parts of it” is presented as a “concession” even by supporters of the move. But the only concession we needed to make, even back in 1967, was giving up the messianic claim that this is our land, from the Bible, and therefore we have a right to it. In comparison with this claim, the Serbs, with their preoccupation over the Battle of Kosovo in 1389, are rational, secular people.
Life is in no need of “ancestral rights.” Most of us were born here. That has no connection with the Bible, which for the most part is a very nice book. It has no connection with the prayers of the religious. We don’t need religion, either as a menu in a restaurant or as a strategic analysis.
In a remarkable video from 1978, 28 year old MIT grad Benjamin Netanyahu debates whether there should be a Palestinian state created on the West Bank and Gaza. Netanyahu argues that such a state would have but one goal: to destroy the Jewish state of Israel.
Move on down the road
it leads to social justice
no more broken promises
Sing up Eddie Mabo.
Always blaming the victim
Still suffering curable disease
Time to end the genocide
remember Eddie Mabo.
Migaloo, keep your promises
cooperation or divided nation,
with the Land there’s hope
sing up Eddie Mabo.
Time for reconciliation
no more procrastination
move on down the road
remember Eddie Mabo.
Bureaucrats keep changing rules
for racist redneck fools
But Eddie Mabo knew the way
the true meaning of the Land.
Jinjirrie 1993
Eddie Koiki Mabo (c. 29 June 1936 – 21 January 1992)[1] was a Torres Strait Islander who is known for his role in campaigning for Indigenous land rights and for his role in a landmark decision of the High Court of Australia that overturned the legal fiction of terra nullius which characterised Australian law with regards to land and title.
@AboriginalOz It’s the last day of #ReconciliationWeek & exactly 1 year away from the 20th Anniversary of the Mabo Decision. 1 year to get the Vibe back! #
Here’s a victory for reason – well done to British academics! Britain’s largest trade union for academics, the UCU, to the consternation of zionists ‘has voted to disassociate itself from the EU working definition of anti-Semitism’ and supports BDS.
70 EUMC working definition of anti-semitism – National Executive Committee
Congress notes with concern that the so-called ‘EUMC working definition of antisemitism’, while not adopted by the EU or the UK government and having no official status, is being used by bodies such as the NUS and local student unions in relation to activities on campus.
Congress believes that the EUMC definition confuses criticism of Israeli government policy and actions with genuine antisemitism, and is being used to silence debate about Israel and Palestine on campus.
Congress resolves:
that UCU will make no use of the EUMC definition (e.g. in educating members or dealing with internal complaints)
that UCU will dissociate itself from the EUMC definition in any public discussion on the matter in which UCU is involved
that UCU will campaign for open debate on campus concerning Israel’s past history and current policy, while continuing to combat all forms of racial or religious discrimination.
This successful motion follows on the UCU resolution carried on the 29th May backing BDS below:
36 Composite: Threats to academic freedom in Israel and Palestine – National Executive Committee , LSE
Congress notes:
Israel’s continued illegal occupation of Palestine and daily oppression of Palestinian teachers and students
the restrictions on the free movement of Palestinian Academics within the Occupied Territories and crossing between the Territories and Israel and on foreign travel
Israel’s ongoing construction of settlements
the current witch-hunting of Israeli academics, civil rights campaigners and NGOs who are deemed to be damaging Israel’s economic interests by their political activities
the recent alarming moves in the Israeli Knesset to penalise Israeli academics who support boycott action or even just provide information which may assist boycotts; this law will lay academics open to fines of £5000 with ‘no need to demonstrate that injury was done’ and to unlimited damages if losses are caused.
the petition from 155 Israeli academics expressing their ‘unwillingness to take part in any type of academic activity taking place in the college operating in the settlement of Ariel’, calling Ariel an illegal settlement whose existence contravenes international law and the Geneva Convention.
Congress deplores these attacks on the academic freedom of our Palestinian and Israeli colleagues.
Congress instructs NEC to:
circulate to all members
the call by the Israeli academics
the PACBI call for academic and cultural boycott of Israel
information about the current legislation passing through the Knesset threatening heavy fines and other penalties on Israelis taking non-violent action against the occupation.
seek a delegation to meet the Israeli Ambassador to raise our concerns
press the Foreign Office to protest to the Israeli Government
raise the issue with Education International and press them to seek similar action by all affiliates
publicise these threats and our actions in response.
Well, Kevin Rudd and Paul Howes, is BDS so nutty now that the largest academic union in the EU supports it?
This week Liverpool University withdrew a course delivered to students in the medical faculty as a result of a complaint made by one student objecting to a talk reporting on medical issues in Palestine.
Liverpool UCU has called for the re-instatement of the Healthy Inclusions course and for the university to be robust in defending the freedom of its staff to select the content and delivery of course material without interference.
The university has refused to reinstate the course and signalled their intention to incorporate the course into mainstream teaching in the interests of ensuring ‘balance’.
Congress condemns the decision to withdraw the course, and calls on the NEC to:
write to the university
publicise the issue nationally and encourage a letter writing campaign
consider how the growing number of threats to academic freedom can be effectively resisted in the current climate driving market-led provision.
‘In fact, the document appears to be dead in the water as far as the Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), the successor body to the EUMC, is concerned. They recently told me that feedback on initial testing of the document ‘drew attention to a number of issues which impacted on its effectiveness as a data collection support tool.’ In other words, it wasn’t useful. “Since its development we are not aware of any public authority in the EU that applies it,” the FRA official added. Moreover, “The FRA has no plans for any further development of the ‘working definition’.” (24 August 2010)
The latest FRA publication on the topic – its Working Paper Anti-Semitism: Summary overview of the situation in the European Union 2001-2009 (April 2010) does not even mention the “working definition”. It does complain (p.3) that: “Even where data exist they are not comparable, since they are collected using different definitions and methodologies.” That was precisely the reason why an operational definition was called for in the first place. The “working definition” clearly does not provide this.’
‘In short: the EUMC working definition has little to do with fighting antisemitism and a lot to do with waging a propaganda war against critics of Israel. It is time it was buried and the UCU decision to take it on is hopefully a step in that direction. The fight against antisemitism should not be muddied by those who confuse criticism of Israeli violations of human rights and international law with hatred of Jews. It is clearly no such thing.’
Gidi Grinstein, the founder and president of Israel’s Reut Institute argues that US President Barack Obama should support the Palestinian Authority’s unilateral efforts to seek recognition of a Palestinian state at the UN in September. The reasons he gives, however, have nothing to do with supporting Palestinian rights, but precisely with negating them. Grinstein writes:
a declaration of a Palestinian state in September includes the possibility of a diplomatic breakthrough as well as significant advantages for Israel. The establishment of such a state will help anchor the principle of two states for two peoples, shape the permanent situation with Israel controlling the security assets and the new state’s surroundings, and diminish the refugee problem by marginalizing UNRWA and limiting refugee status.
Despite Obama’s speeches, the diplomatic process will remain at a dead end as the moment of decision in September approaches. Then the United States will have another opportunity to do the right thing: to ensure that the establishment of a Palestinian state conforms to Israel’s needs.
In other words, Grinstein hopes that UN recognition will set rolling a bandwagon that limits any Palestinian state to precisely the kind of demilitarized bantustan under overall Israeli control that will “solve” Israel’s legitimacy and diplomatic problems while marginalizing Palestinian rights, especially refugee rights.
Grinstein’s Reut Institute is the organization that has set out the strategy Israel’s current campaign of “sabotage and attack” aimed at global Palestine solidarity activism, especially the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement.
six participants dressed in suits as members of the Jewish National Fund (JNF) and “proceeded to ‘plant’ trees over the Estee Lauder shop space … flyers were distributed to shoppers and staff informing them that ‘this Estee Lauder space is currently being rezoned.’”
Executive Naomi ‘Chazan’s planned visit was challenged last week when the Shalom Institute, which runs Limmud-Oz, confirmed that a major donor had threatened to withdraw funding for Shalom if Chazan, who also is scheduled to speak at Limmud-Oz, was not removed from the program.’
IN a landmark speech, Paul Keating has called for the onus of proof in the Native Title Act to be reversed so that Aboriginal claimants are no longer required to establish a continuous association with their land. Instead, the former prime minister says, native title objectors should be required to prove a continuous attachment no longer exists.
