“Being in a solidarity movement with Palestinian people is a privilege. We are working against one of the biggest injustices in recent history and we are working also with wonderful people, people who in spite of all the constant Israeli attacks, have not lost their spirit.”
“I found out my indentity was linked to those of people I had never met.”
“Through BDS we get through to Israelis that their actions are not acceptable.”
The ALP is being led by the nose by its fascist old guard moles. ‘For example, Australians participating in Anonymous operations, or perhaps even supporting WikiLeaks or other whistleblower organisations online, may now be legal targets of ASIO surveillance even though they are in Australia and not doing anything that relates to Australia’s security.’ Continued obstructions to — and even blatant denial of — the basic rights of indigenous peoples to land and forests, resulted in their ongoing marginalization and persistent poverty
The ethnic cleansing of Palestine by Zionist forces began in late 1947, so that by 15 May 1948, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians had already been expelled from their villages and cities before a single soldier from any Arab army had intervened. The exodus from, for example, Jaffa began in early 1948 after Zionist terrorists belonging to the Stern Gang set off a massive car bomb destroying the Jaffa municipality building on 4 January (this is all well-documented in books by right-wing Israeli historian Benny Morris, among others). Many villages in the north of Palestine were also depopulated around that time.
‘Looking at what was happening on the ground during December 1947-15 May 1948 was teh first track we followed in examining the Israeli version of the events of this period; the second track was to challenge the Israeli lie of evacuation orders head on. If the orders were broadcast as the government of Israel, its top leadership and the Kimches et al. insisted, and if these orders reached hundreds of villages and a dozen towns causing their evacuation by hundreds of thousands, surely some tract or echo of these orders should be on record. The obvious place to look was the back files of the Near East monitoring stations of the British and American governments (the BBC Cyprus listening post and the CIA-sponsored Foreign Broadcast Information Service), both of which covered not only all the radio stations in the Near East, but also the local newspapers as well. I therefore checked the BBC monitoring archives at the British Museum, London, and published the result in my article “Why Did the Palestinians Leave?” (Middle East Forum July 1959). Not only was there no hint of any Arab evacuation order, but the Arab radio stations had urged the Palestinians to hold on and be steadfast whereas it was the Jewish radio stations of the Haganah and the Irgun and Stern Gang which had been engaged in incessant and strident psychological warfare against the Arab civilian population.’
It must be clear that there is no room in the country for both peoples.… If the Arabs leave it, the country will become wide and spacious for us … There is no room for compromises … There is no way but to transfer the Arabs from here to the neighbouring countries, to transfer all of them, save perhaps for Bethlehem, Nazareth and old Jerusalem. Not one village must be left, not one [bedouin] tribe … For this goal funds will be found … And only after this transfer will the country be able to absorb millions of our brothers and the Jewish problem will cease to exist. There is no other solution.[89]
‘There is no hope that this new Jewish state will survive,
to say nothing of develop, if the Arabs are as numerous as
they are today.” So spoke Menahem Ussishkin, at 75, one of
the oldest and most respected Zionist leaders. His audience
on the afternoon of 12 June 1938 was the Executive Commit-
tee of the Jewish Agency, which was considering a plan by
the British administration to divide Palestine between
Arabs and Jews. For decades there had been strife between
the two ethnic groups in the mandate territory and now the
British administration was considering partition as the
best way to end the conflict between the Jewish colonists
and the indigenous Arab population. But partition would
leave over 200,000 Arabs in the proposed Zionist state, and
the leadership of the Jewish community in Palestine was
grappling with the problem of how best to get rid of them.
None of the members of the Executive disagreed with
Ussishkin when he stated: ‘The worst is not that the Arabs
would comprise 45 or 50 per cent of the population of the
new state but that 75 per cent of the land is owned by
Arabs.’ This land was desired for the waves of Jewish immi-
grants who would populate the Jewish state. There were many
other reasons why the Zionists wished to get rid of the
Arabs. Ussishkin claimed that with a large Arab population
the Jewish state would face enormous problems of internal
security and that there would be chaos in government. ‘Even
a small Arab minority in parliament could disrupt the
entire order of parliamentary life.’
In late 1937, a Population Transfer Committee was established in the Jewish Agency to prepare material for the hearings of the Woodhead commision. The main document suggested two goals: reducing the Arab population in the territory intended for the Jewish state, and freeing agricultural land for Jewish settlement. I talso contained a detailed plan for the voluntary transfer of about 100,000 Arab farmers to the Gaza district, Transjordan, and Syria. The committee found it very difficult to reach clear recommendations and made do with the general declaration that “the transfer of Arab population on a large scale is a precondition for establishing the state.”
The Common Archive aims “to create an audio-visual online archive of Jewish executor’s testimonies of the 1948 crimes with cross references to testimonies of Palestinian refugees and other historical visual data (maps, photos, etc).”
The “peace negotiations” were a deceptive farce, whereby biased terms were unilaterally imposed by Israel and systematically endorsed by the US and EU capitals. Far from enabling a negotiated fair end of the conflict, the pursuit of the Oslo process has deepened Israeli segregationist policies and justified the tightening of the security control imposed on the Palestinian population as well as its geographical fragmentation. Far for preserving the land on which to build a State, it has tolerated the intensification of the colonisation of the Palestinian territory. Far from maintaining a national cohesion, the process I participated in, albeit briefly, proved to be instrumental in creating and aggravating divisions amongst Palestinians. In its most recent developments, it became a cruel enterprise from which the Palestinians of Gaza have suffered the most. Last but not least, these negotiations excluded for the most part the great majority of the Palestinian people: the 7 million-Palestinian refugees. My experience over those 11 months spent in Ramallah confirms in fact that the PLO, given its structure, was not in a position to represent all Palestinian rights and interests.
A top military intelligence official has said the discredited dossier on Iraq’s weapons programme was drawn up “to make the case for war”, flatly contradicting persistent claims to the contrary by the Blair government, and in particular by Alastair Campbell, the former prime minister’s chief spin doctor.
In hitherto secret evidence to the Chilcot inquiry, Major General Michael Laurie said: “We knew at the time that the purpose of the dossier was precisely to make a case for war, rather than setting out the available intelligence, and that to make the best out of sparse and inconclusive intelligence the wording was developed with care.”
His evidence is devastating, as it is the first time such a senior intelligence officer has directly contradicted the then government’s claims about the dossier – and, perhaps more significantly, what Tony Blair and Campbell said when it was released seven months before the invasion of Iraq in 2003.
Recognising Indigenous Australians as the first Australians is set to become next great debate on the national agenda. Acknowledged as a “Once in 50 year opportunity” by Prime Minister Julia Gilard it is with reserved optimism and nervous anticipation I, like many Indigenous and Non-Indigenous Australians await the 2011 government proposal and subsequent 2013 Referendum. With only 8 of the past 44 constitutional amendments being successful, it will take a movement at the ballot boxes reminiscent of the 1967 Referendum in which more than 90% of Australians voted in favor of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders being recognised as Australian citizens.
How to tell boycotts, divestments and sanctions (BDS) against apartheid Israel are working? Rightwing zionists in Australia are making a stringent attack on politicians and trade unionists who support human rights and justice for Palestinians and have the temerity to back BDS and oppose Israeli apartheid.
Opposition senator Eric Abetz successfully moved a motion raising concerns about the Greens, Labor and union support of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign against Israel after Marrickville council’s brief adoption of the policy. “The Senate condemned those in the Labor Party, the Greens and unions who are supporting the BDS campaign against Israel,” Senator Abetz said.
…
NSW Jewish Board of Deputies chief executive Vic Alhadeff slammed Ms Rhiannon’s involvement with the [Coalition for Justice and Peace in Palestine] forum, which he described as “an activist conference lacking any hint of balance or academic integrity on a divisive and complex issue”.
Rightwing zionists and supporters have already shown their colours by organising against Marrickville Council’s resolution on BDS, marshalling Christian zionists and rightwing Jewish zionists to combine forces in the Inner West Jewish Community and Friends Peace Alliance, which ran a phone push poll and other PR endeavours prior to the NSW State Election in Marrickville.
On March 3 a request from the group was accidentally published on the Jewish news website J-Wire and a blog, requesting $12,000 in public donations for activities ”to research what local people really think … carefully targeted media coverage and advertising in relation to the election … Please also pass this information on quietly to like-minded friends”. It was quickly deleted.
Eleven days later Marrickville Council said it was investigating four complaints from residents about a survey ”asking residents to comment on the GBDS against Israel”. At least one resident complained the interviewer had claimed to be from the council.
…
Vic Alhadeff, chief executive of the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies, said his organisation had no knowledge of the poster campaign, or the phone survey, until afterwards.
However, Alhadeff’s comment was disingenuous – the cached blog post of the Inner West Jewish Community and Friends Peace Alliance says:
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.
A few days ago, an unprincipled slur against Senator-elect Lee Rhiannon of the Greens was proliferated by The Australian, which has unswervingly offered slanted opinion on BDS, Israel and Palestine, notably failing to publish any stories by Palestinian advocates prior to the NSW State Election and Marrickville Council vote on BDS.
In view of the call by the Palestinian Trade Union Coalition for BDS (PTUC-BDS) for solidarity from trade unions around the world, the motion by Senator Abetz to apply political pressure to the ACTU is way out of order. Since when has the Liberal party’s ambit been Australian trade unions and workers? – as ever, Israel is a special case for these sycophantic supporters of the rogue zionist entity. As Australian citizens, we should be extremely concerned that the zionist lobby buys off our politicians’ and Australia’s stance for justice and rights for oppressed people.
Please contact Senator Abetz and Julie Bishop below and tell them Israel, in contravention of more than two score UN Security Council resolutions, should butt out of Australian politics, that they should clarify any lurks and perks provided by zionists to their political campaigns, and remind them that boycotts, divestments and sanctions are the legitimate non-violent tactic called for by oppressed Palestinian civil society for long overdue justice and rights.
Senator Eric Abetz
GPO Box 1675. HOBART TAS 7001
Email:
Web: http://abetz.com.au/contact
Electorate Office Numbers:
Telephone: (03) 6224 3707
Facsimile: (03) 6224 3709
Toll Free: 1300 132 493
The Hon Julie Bishop, MP
414 Rokeby Road
Subiaco, WA 6008
PO Box 2010
Subiaco, WA 6904
Email:
Phone: (08) 9388 0288
Fax: (08) 9388 0299
Web & Blog: http://www.juliebishop.com.au/
For information on how to address an Australian politician, see here.
Further to the existent and potential neoliberalism (formalisation of bantustan economy) in any incipient Palestinian state is the role that state of bantustans would play in the predatory US regional strategic plan as it counters the ‘arab spring’. Since Nutanyahoo doesn’t have the political capital or intention to offer a viable sovereign Palestinian state, the possibility for such is strictly hypothetical.
As more countries recognise a Palestinian state prior to another proposed declaration of same in September, Israeli politicians have moved to counter it with plans for annexation. However, if the OPT or parts thereof are annexed, Israel will have institutionalised apartheid systemically, highlighting the existing Palestinian bantustans and the two tiered racist zionist entity where non-jews are discriminated against by more than 20 laws. At that point, Israel will become unsustainable to the point of complete self-delegitimisation. The struggle will then be firmly focussed on equal rights for all, and the ethical nature of and necessity for BDS, boycotts, divestments and sanctions will be affirmed even more strongly.
Hamas has long signalled its desire to move away from armed struggle toward purely political means – this is the essence of its proposed hudna, or long-term truce, with Israel. It is of course possible to defend the legitimate and universal right to armed resistance against occupation, while choosing not to exercise it. “Where there is occupation and settlement, there is a right to resistance. Israel is the aggressor,” Meshaal told The New York Times on May 5, “But resistance is a means, not an end.”
Yet to choose different means, a movement has to have a viable political strategy and a clear definition of its ends. Hamas has failed to articulate, or to rally the Palestinian people around either. Instead its strategy appears to be simply to sign on to the inherently unjust, and infeasible “two-state solution” – and hope for admission to “the peace process”.
