Anti-Semitic cops beat me, says Israeli-American tycoon
Last update - 07:18 21/08/2009
By Raphael Ahren
Tags: Israel News, anti-Semitism
The savior of Beitar Jerusalem asserted this week that he was abused by anti-Semitic policemen in Florida, after a newspaper reported the U.S.-Israeli businessman and philanthropist had been arrested on charges of driving under the influence and drug possession in Broward County in June.
"They beat the shit out of me," Guma Aguiar, 32, told Haaretz. "That's how I can sum it up, I got the shit kicked out of me by a bunch of anti-Semitic cops... There's no doubt it was anti-Semitism."
He said he has photos of himself from before and after the incident, when he "walked out of that jail a few hours later with all these bruises and cuts all over my face, and broken fingers."
Aguiar's spokesman, Charley Levine, said Aguiar's lawyers have declined so far to release the photos of the incident.
Aguiar, who supports Jewish causes in Israel and abroad, said police officers beat him because he was wearing a T-Shirt with the word "Israel" and a Star of David printed on it. "The policeman asked me if I don't believe in Jesus," Aguiar is quoted as saying. "After that, they took my mug shot, and I asked them if they also wanted a photo of me smiling. That same policeman responded with a punch. I told him: 'Very good, you just lost your job.' Then the others joined in and beat me."
Responding to a Haaretz query, Jim Leljedal, a spokesman for the Broward County Sheriff's Office, said that during the booking process, "Aguiar became combative and verbally abusive, and was controlled and restrained [by police]. His arrest and the subsequent use of force were well documented."
The office's official event report - a copy of which was obtained by Haaretz - describes repeated "violent action" by Aguiar, such as trying to head butt an officer. Upon seeing this, another officer "gained control of inmate Aguiar's wrists and applied pressure to his wrist as inmate Aguiar continued to resist," according to the report.
After the incident, Aguiar was screened by medical staff, which noted "injuries to both his wrists, left eye and left flank area." According to an internal police memo, "the action taken by staff ... was necessary to control a violent inmate and were within policy and procedural guidelines."
There was no indication of anti-Semitism, Leljedal said, adding Aguiar never formally complained about his arrest or the treatment he received in custody. Aguiar said his legal team has already compiled "a complete investigative case," but whether he will file charges against the police will depend on the outcome of the suit.
"Guma did not act in any way inappropriately while in prison," commented Levine about the report. "Yes, it's an official police report but we contest what is written there. When the final remaining charge is dismissed we believe it will reflect that our version was the accurate version."
On June 19, the Brazilian-born billionaire was driving on Dixie Highway in Oakland Park when a police officer saw his black Bentley "drifting across the double yellow center line straddling south- and northbound lanes," according to the police report. After seeing this happen three times, Detective Costanzo, of the Broward County sheriff's office, stopped Aguiar's car.
Aguiar told the detective he had just gotten in from Chicago and wanted to smoke some "weed," according to the report, and the officer noted Aguiar made "repetitive admissions about his cannabis use." After Aguiar failed part of a sobriety test, the officers searched his car and found two glass pipes and "a small plastic bag containing about five grams of cannabis and a small container containing cannabis tar."
According to the report, Aguiar would at times "become angry and stated we would all loose [sic] our jobs and then while in the holding cell he kept banging on the metal bench."
Police released Aguiar on a $200 bail 10 hours after the arrest, and the initial charges of driving under the influence were dropped "because, after reviewing all the evidence presented by police, [the prosecutors] did not believe they would be able to go to court and prove he was driving while under the influence," Ron Ishoy, a spokesman for the Broward state attorney's office, told Haaretz.
Aguiar had no alcohol in his system at the time of his arrest.
Aguiar, who lives in Jerusalem, is still being charged with possession of marijuana and possession of drug paraphernalia - two relatively minor misdemeanors, which are not likely to result in more than probation. His next court hearing is scheduled for September 19. "I'm not admitting to anything," Aguiar told Haaretz. "All I'm saying is let's go look at the facts ... I got nothing to hide."
While Aguiar declined to comment on whether cannabis was found in his vehicle or not, he denied the event unfolded as described by the police report. Rather, he said, he passed all the physical tests.
In an article published in the sports section of Yedioth Ahronoth earlier this week, Aguiar - who recently became Beitar Jerusalem's main sponsor - denied all charges and suggested the family of his uncle, Thomas Kaplan, with whom he is involved in a billion dollar lawsuit, was behind the incident. "They framed me," Aguiar is quoted as saying. "I'm driving in a $300,000 car, a short time after I left the plane that brought me from Chicago, and they jumped me right away. Does that make sense? It was all bullshit. I didn't say the things they claim. They set me up."
Kaplan, with whom Aguiar co-founded in 2003 an energy company that is the foundation of Aguiar's wealth, filed two lawsuits against his nephew. A Florida court threw out the first case accusing Aguiar of misusing family foundation funds, but the second case involving the company, recently sold for $2.5 billion, is still pending.
Kaplan's attorney, Harley Tropin, told Haaretz his client "will not comment at this time as there is a pending lawsuit and the court papers speak for themselves."
According to Levine, Aguiar's lawyers believe that whatever the outcome of the case, it "will not be more than a traffic ticket. It's not even a misdemeanor. More relevantly, they are very confident that there will be no charges whatsoever."
======================================/
Share |
Last update - 16:08 23/08/2009
Jewish skullcaps - 'Made in Palestine'
By Reuters
Tags: West Bank, Israel News
Of all the cottage industries you might expect to find in the Israeli- occupied West Bank, the crocheting of Jewish skullcaps by Palestinian hands seems one of the oddest.
But creating the colorful cap, known in Hebrew as a "kippah," keeps hundreds of women busy in villages like Deir Abu Meshal, which have been making the religious headgear for their Jewish neighbors for some 40 years.
Almost every house in the village of 3,000 west of Ramallah makes the little caps. It's a social event as well as a helpful cash-earner. Women bring their wool and needles to each other's home to crochet and chat.
"We make qors (the Arab name for kippah translates as 'disc') while having a gossip," said Umm Ali. "We meet each other and we make money at the same time," added the mother of three, whose husband is unemployed.
The women make around five caps a day, worth about 12 shekels each.
"Women here can't sit down without knitting. We've gotten used to it," jokes Ruqaya Barghouthi.
Six Palestinian skullcap dealers distribute the wool, needles and the models to women in this village and 10 neighboring villages.
The finished articles are collected each week and shipped to Israeli retailers. The skullcaps are also exported to the United States.
"The kippah business is what makes my shop busy. Women buy stuff from the kippah money they earn," said Riyad Ata, whose grocery store serves as a collection point for finished caps from some 100 women.
Observant Jews wear a kippah, which means dome in Hebrew, to cover the head in acknowledgement of the supreme God.
The women of Deir Abu Meshal, known for its traditional dress embroidery, say that to them it's merely a business.
They say they have no qualms about furnishing skullcaps for the people of the occupying power or the Jewish settler, who may be living on Palestinian land.
They say the work is convenient: they don't have to travel.
"Without this knitting business, people here would be very poor," said Nema Khamis, 50, who passed on her skills to her five daughters and daughter-in-law.
Palestinian weavers used to make the traditional keffiyeh, the checkered Arab headscarf that late leader Yasser Arafat made a national Palestinian symbol. But much of that business has now gone to China, where costs are lower.
======================================/
Dutch journalist: Flu pandemics are Jewish conspiracy
By Cnaan Liphshiz, Haaretz Correspondent
Tags: Israel News, Jewish World
A journalist from Holland who linked Jews to the recent outbreak of flu pandemics drew heavy criticism from a prominent Dutch Jewish organization earlier this week, that claimed her words were tantamount to anti-Semitic blood libels.
Holland's largest daily, De Telegraf last week printed an interview with Désirée Röver, 61, who proposed the bird flu pandemic, caused by the virus H5N1, was part of an international conspiracy to reduce the world's population.
Röver is quoted as saying the conspiracy can be traced back to a group of descendants of the Khazars, a nation from the Caucasus believed to have converted to Judaism 1,200 years ago.
De Telegraaf quotes her as saying that these descendants are now "praying to another god; Lucifer, Satan, or however you want to call him" and "are called Rockefeller, Rothschild, Brezinski and Kissinger."
Ronny Naftaniel, who heads the Center for Information and Documentation on Israel (CIDI) - an local anti-Semitism watchdog - said that this is the first time he has heard such claims from Rover, and added that based on her words, "she does not seem to be right in her head."
Tales of Jews spreading disease "is nothing new," he told Haaretz, "and stories of Jews poisoning the water wells are known from many centuries ago and her words are giving rise to that anti-Semitism."
CIDI, he added, will look into the possibility of lodging a formal complaint against Rover, though no such decision has been made as of yet. Dutch law stipulates that only people with malicious intent can be convicted of inciting hatred or anti-Semitism
======================================/
Last update - 15:49 31/08/2009
One day to go, yet some Ethiopian students still have no school
By Or Kashti and Dana Weiler-Polak, Haaretz Correspondents
Tags: Israel News
Education Minister Gideon Sa'ar (Likud) on Monday slammed a proposed agreement reached between Petah Tikva and local state religious schools regarding the fate of Ethiopian students as having been drafted behind his back.
Petah Tikva's Mayor Yitzhak Ohayon on Sunday announced that an agreement had been outlined to enroll the Ethiopian students initially banned from some of the city's schools, but that it has yet to be approved by the Education Ministry.
According to the plan - which was agreed upon during a meeting between Ohayon, the principals of three private religious schools and Kadima MK Ronit Tirosh, who headed the Knesset's Lobby for the Advancement of Education - the three schools would enroll 30 students instead of 50.
Sa'ar on Monday called the agreement "fraudulent and deceptive" and argued that the agreement lowers by 50 percent the number of students that the three schools has to absorb, in short allowing the schools to avoid absorbing the students.
"Who does this compromise include? It doesn't include the committee of parents, or the state religious schools," said Sa'ar, "This is a deceptive agreement between the city and three schools. In short, we have an agreement that is completely unstable. We still don?t know who will be received into which school."
Sephardi Chief Rabbi Shlomo Amar said Monday that students of Ethiopian origin could not be accepted into religious schools in Petah Tikva because of "halakhic reasons," referring to proof of the immigrants' Jewish status.
Sa'ar met with Amar on Sunday night and requested that he check the possibility that the Ethiopian students still not enrolled in schools be sent to secular state-funded institutions. Sa'ar also proposed that Ethiopians assigned to state schools be given lessons in Judaism by religious educators.
Meanwhile, around 200 people protested Monday morning in Petah Tikva against the decision by three local private religious schools to ban Ethiopian students.
The demonstrators, among them activists from the religious Zionist youth group Bnei Akiva and from the Working and Studying Youth Movement, wore shirts emblazoned with slogans such as "Enough discrimination, we are all Jews," and "We want to learn in Petah Tikva."
Demonstrator Uri Kabado criticized Sa'ar for his offer to send the children to non-religious schools.
"This is a democratic state, the parents must have the option of sending their children to the type of education they choose. Sa'ar is trying to get out of his obligations and find a solution but that cannot be done at just any price," he said.
The Education Ministry on Sunday announced that it would cut funding for the three private religious schools in Petah Tikva that refused to enroll Ethiopian students for the 2009-10 school year, which begins on Tuesday.
======================================/
Last update - 22:25 30/08/2009
State cuts funds for Petah Tikva schools that banned Ethiopians
By Or Kashti and Haaretz Service
Tags: Israel News, Petah Tikva
The Education Ministry on Sunday announced it would cut funding for three state-religious schools in Petah Tikva, after they refused to enroll Ethiopian students.
The ministry's decision comes after a parents' committee representing the schools rejected Petah Tikvah's Mayor Yitzhak Ohayon's proposal, which would allow some of the pupils to enroll in three institutions, while others would be absorbed in other schools across the city.
Ohayon on Sunday said that an agreement has been outlined to enroll the Ethiopian students initially banned from some of the city's schools, but that it has yet to be approved by the Education Ministry.
According to the plan - which was agreed upon during a meeting between Ohayon, the principals of three private religious schools and Kadima MK Ronit Tirosh, who headed the Knesset's Lobby for the Advancement of Education - the three schools would enroll 30 students instead of 50.
The plan also calls for 34 additional students to be integrated into state-religious schools in the city and 45 more students to enroll in other schools that are recognized but are not officially state-funded.
Ohayon said that the students would be integrated into regular classes without preconditions. However, documents he presented indicated that the enrollment in the private schools would be in accordance with the "standard way of life" acceptable in these schools - meaning that the schools may decide not to allow the students to enroll.
The parents' committee said the mayor's proposal would continue to divide Ethiopian students unequally among the religious schools in the city.
The committee is still planning to strike the opening of the school year on Tuesday.
Kadima MK Shlomo Mula called the mayor's proposal "shameful and insulting," adding that it essentially "authorizes a racist policy for private schools."
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said earlier Sunday that the refusal of Petah Tikva religious schools to enroll Ethiopian students is "an attack on our morals, contradicting our ethos as a country, as a society, as
Jews and as Israelis."
The three private ultra-Orthodox schools in Petah Tikva, Darkei Noam, Lamerhav and Da'at Mevinim have been persistent in their refusal to enroll 100 students of Ethiopian origin.
The PM's comment on Israel Radio came while the former director-general of the education ministry MK Tirosh is to present a compromise to the principals of three Petah Tikva private ultra-Orthodox schools on Sunday, in an attempt to end recent strains over their refusal to admit Ethiopian students.
According to the offer, students of Ethiopian origin would be included in all of the city's religious schools without having to pass admissions tests.
Furthermore, private institutions will place those students in regular classes, and not in "assimilation" classes, as the three schools offered.
The proposal also states that immigrant students would also attend extra curricular classes, meant to support struggling students ahead of their regular classes.
These lessons would become available to all the students who need extra work, and not just those from immigrant families, the proposal says.
Their principals have informed the Education Ministry last week that they would not attend the hearing scheduled in the ministry's director-general office on Sunday.
However, on Sunday the principals added that they did not yet reach a decision on whether to attend the hearing, with a "final decision to be announced on Sunday."
Last Wednesday it was reported that the Education Ministry was preparing to immediately pull all funding for private Orthodox schools that refused to enroll Ethiopian immigrant children, according to various ministry sources.
"These schools will have to come to their senses and decide where they stand vis-a-vis Israeli society," Education Minster Gideon Sa'ar told Haaretz in an interview last Tuesday.
Principals of three private Orthodox schools in Petah Tikva that refuse to enroll immigrant children from Ethiopia said Saturday they would not attend a hearing in the office of Education Ministry director general Shimshon Shoshani today.
The principals of Lamerhav continued, however, to refuse to take immigrant children from Ethiopia into their schools, despite the Education Ministry's threat to pull their funding.
The principals argued on Tuesday that the issue should be addressed with the other private schools in the city, including two ultra-Orthodox ones.
"If all the private schools were invited to discuss the issue, the three principals would come too," they said.
"If the Education Ministry insists on equal enrollment of immigrant children from Ethiopia, then the remaining Orthodox [private] schools in town should also be part of it," one of the principals said.
======================================/
Share |
Last update - 12:57 30/08/2009
Israelis must stand with Ethiopian students over school ban
By Yossi Sarid
Tags: Ethiopian school ban
There is only one subject that doesn't have to be studied, that is best lived, experienced. Math, English, even Bible study cannot be traded for life experience, and doesn't need to be. Civics is the only subject that can and should be put to the test of daily life.
The new school year starts on Tuesday, and we are already being tested. This year we cannot respond as we did last year. There is no rest for the wicked, and the wicked are those who schemed to leave children of Ethiopian descent outside the fence, looking in, longing to be on the other side. Tell it not in Stockholm, publish it not in the streets of Oslo, lest the newspapers of the uncircumcised rejoice.
In two days' time Israeli society may be facing a badly timed window of opportunity, one we never imagined in our worst nightmares but which, to our shame, is before is. It is an opportunity for the entire educational system to practice what it preaches in civics classes.
It is an opportunity for the education system to teach a chapter of immeasurable value in good citizenship, a lesson so important that it could replace an entire year of civics lessons and thereby save valuable classroom hours.
If religious schools in Petah Tikva or anywhere else insist on refusing to admit Ethiopian students, if all of the pleading and threats of the education minister don't help, then every Israeli will have no choice but to identify with the Ethiopian children in whose faces the gate of apartheid has been slammed. No one will be able to make do any longer with admonishments and reproofs.
The entire education system will go on strike in solidarity with the little girl who stands and asks why. There is no value in education for values if one black boy remains shunned and shamed.
A thousand outstanding teachers and ten thousand outstanding lessons would not erase this black mark if we discharge our duty with lip service. The education minister's most recent sermon, in which he said "the most important thing is to strengthen education of Jewish, Zionist, democratic and social values," will ring hollow, worthless and embarrassing.
And so, with public opinion firmly behind us - including including students, parents and teachers - we shall lock the gates of every school. If the Ethiopian children are not allowed in, then we too, all of us, will remain outside with them, until a gate of hope ("Petah Tikva") opens to an Israeli society that is before our eyes becoming ugly to the point that it is unrecognizable, and which we must change.
If a general strike is too much for some parents who are already preparing their children ready for school, I have an alternative: All the celebrities that Education Minister Gideon Sa'ar invited to teach at schools on Tuesday should devote their remarks to those same children who don't have a classroom, or a teacher, or classmates.
======================================/
Peres: Schools' refusal to take Ethiopian students is a disgrace
By Or Kashti
President Shimon Peres yesterday slammed the refusal by a number of schools in Petah Tikva to enroll Ethiopian immigrant children.
The decision not to enroll the students is "a disgrace no Israeli can accept," Peres said, speaking to 10th graders in Kfar Hamaccabiah.
Nobel Prize Laureate Desmond Tutu also commented on the issue, saying that the pictures of the children demonstrating against their discrimination on Haaretz's front page filled him with sorrow and reminded him of things he had forgotten.
"Let me give you an example," Peres told a student who asked him how to influence social processes. "In your place I would get on a bus and go straight to Petah Tikva to demonstrate against the people who object to enrolling Ethiopian students in three schools."
Peres told the students that teenagers have a huge power to move processes. "Don't hesitate, make your voice heard," he said.
The three private ultra-Orthodox schools in Petah Tikva, Darkei Noam, Lamerhav and Da'at Mevinim are persisting in their refusal to enroll 100 students of Ethiopian origin. Their principals have informed the Education Ministry that they would not attend the hearing scheduled in the ministry's director general Shimshon Shoshani's office.
Peres' statements came after it was reported that the Education Ministry is preparing to immediately pull all funding for private Orthodox schools that refuse to enroll Ethiopian immigrant children, according to various ministry sources.
Ministry officials said the funding would stop unless the schools agreed by Sunday - two days before the school year begins - to enroll all the students assigned to them.
"These schools will have to come to their senses and decide where they stand vis-a-vis Israeli society," Education Minster Gideon Sa'ar told Haaretz in an interview yesterday.
"Society craves a discourse based on values, contrary to what some cynics think," Sa'ar said. "The students leave school without knowing who Herzl was and what 'Shma Yisrael' is. We must change that. In addition to deepening Zionist and Jewish values, social and democratic aspects are also important. We must educate students to tolerance and to receive the other. These values are especially important in Israel's heterogenic and tribal society."
Sa'ar intends to stop the Jewish studies program introduced by former education minister, Yuli Tamir, to junior high students. He is planning a "Jewish heritage and culture" program for fourth to ninth-grade students, in which students will learn about the Hebrew calendar, the national anthem and flag, Jerusalem's centrality and more.
The program includes a trip to Jerusalem and encouraging students to enlist to the IDF and national service.
Sa'ar believes that liberal theories led to the destruction of the education system.
"Many countries in the world have long given up the liberal theories [emphasizing the student's centrality in the education process], which only destroy the education system," he said. "Our program is balanced. It includes teaching 'life skills' and listening to students. The balance must be shifted toward bolstering authority and creating an atmosphere conducive to studying."
"I have very liberal views and I don't come from a conservative background, but I cannot ignore the outcry of teachers and principals who feel abandoned in the daily struggle in the education arena," he added. "I remember my mother, who was a high school teacher, seeing the deterioration in students' behavior toward teachers and each other ... If we can change the conduct and discipline factors even a little it would help to improve achievements."
The violence and disciplinary problems are part of the "I deserve - I feel like it" attitude, he says.
"We have to stop this attitude," he says. "The education system has gone backward, not only in discipline but in setting goals for the students. I'm not suggesting making students stand in the corner but there's certainly room to examine some of the teaching practices of the past, like learning classical cultural landmarks by heart. Why shouldn't a student know 'Devorah's Song' by heart?"
Sa'ar is also determined to bolster the state education system in the face of the growing private school networks, which receive generous state and municipal funding.
Sa'ar promised to prepare a detailed, politically viable plan that would change this trend. He said he is well aware of the objections this will raise in the ultra-Orthodox community, whose schools comprise most of the "recognized but unofficial" education systems.
======================================/
Peres: Schools' refusal to take Ethiopian students is a disgrace
By Or Kashti
President Shimon Peres yesterday slammed the refusal by a number of schools in Petah Tikva to enroll Ethiopian immigrant children.
The decision not to enroll the students is "a disgrace no Israeli can accept," Peres said, speaking to 10th graders in Kfar Hamaccabiah.
Nobel Prize Laureate Desmond Tutu also commented on the issue, saying that the pictures of the children demonstrating against their discrimination on Haaretz's front page filled him with sorrow and reminded him of things he had forgotten.
"Let me give you an example," Peres told a student who asked him how to influence social processes. "In your place I would get on a bus and go straight to Petah Tikva to demonstrate against the people who object to enrolling Ethiopian students in three schools."
Peres told the students that teenagers have a huge power to move processes. "Don't hesitate, make your voice heard," he said.
The three private ultra-Orthodox schools in Petah Tikva, Darkei Noam, Lamerhav and Da'at Mevinim are persisting in their refusal to enroll 100 students of Ethiopian origin. Their principals have informed the Education Ministry that they would not attend the hearing scheduled in the ministry's director general Shimshon Shoshani's office.
Peres' statements came after it was reported that the Education Ministry is preparing to immediately pull all funding for private Orthodox schools that refuse to enroll Ethiopian immigrant children, according to various ministry sources.
Ministry officials said the funding would stop unless the schools agreed by Sunday - two days before the school year begins - to enroll all the students assigned to them.
"These schools will have to come to their senses and decide where they stand vis-a-vis Israeli society," Education Minster Gideon Sa'ar told Haaretz in an interview yesterday.
"Society craves a discourse based on values, contrary to what some cynics think," Sa'ar said. "The students leave school without knowing who Herzl was and what 'Shma Yisrael' is. We must change that. In addition to deepening Zionist and Jewish values, social and democratic aspects are also important. We must educate students to tolerance and to receive the other. These values are especially important in Israel's heterogenic and tribal society."
Sa'ar intends to stop the Jewish studies program introduced by former education minister, Yuli Tamir, to junior high students. He is planning a "Jewish heritage and culture" program for fourth to ninth-grade students, in which students will learn about the Hebrew calendar, the national anthem and flag, Jerusalem's centrality and more.
The program includes a trip to Jerusalem and encouraging students to enlist to the IDF and national service.
Sa'ar believes that liberal theories led to the destruction of the education system.
"Many countries in the world have long given up the liberal theories [emphasizing the student's centrality in the education process], which only destroy the education system," he said. "Our program is balanced. It includes teaching 'life skills' and listening to students. The balance must be shifted toward bolstering authority and creating an atmosphere conducive to studying."
"I have very liberal views and I don't come from a conservative background, but I cannot ignore the outcry of teachers and principals who feel abandoned in the daily struggle in the education arena," he added. "I remember my mother, who was a high school teacher, seeing the deterioration in students' behavior toward teachers and each other ... If we can change the conduct and discipline factors even a little it would help to improve achievements."
The violence and disciplinary problems are part of the "I deserve - I feel like it" attitude, he says.
"We have to stop this attitude," he says. "The education system has gone backward, not only in discipline but in setting goals for the students. I'm not suggesting making students stand in the corner but there's certainly room to examine some of the teaching practices of the past, like learning classical cultural landmarks by heart. Why shouldn't a student know 'Devorah's Song' by heart?"
Sa'ar is also determined to bolster the state education system in the face of the growing private school networks, which receive generous state and municipal funding.
Sa'ar promised to prepare a detailed, politically viable plan that would change this trend. He said he is well aware of the objections this will raise in the ultra-Orthodox community, whose schools comprise most of the "recognized but unofficial" education systems.
======================================/
Last update - 07:57 21/08/2009
Education Ministry: Petah Tikva schools must accept Ethiopian kids
By Or Kashti
Tags: Israel education, Petah Tikva
The Education Ministry will not back down on its demand that all schools in Petah Tikva accept children of immigrants from Ethiopia, said the ministry's director-general, Shimshon Shoshani. He threatened the schools with sanctions if they do not come around.
Shoshani was referring to around 100 children who, 10 days before the opening of the school year, have not been accepted at Petah Tikva schools. Private religious schools in the city, which use a curriculum similar to the state religious system, say they refuse to accept the students assigned to them by the municipality unless they can first determine if the children suit the schools' character.
"We will not back down on our demands from the racist schools in Petah Tikva," Shoshani said at a conference for local authorities' education departments on the new school year.
Shoshani added that his office was in the process of making changes that would limit the number of new schools to open. The schools in question are formally recognized, though they are not part of the education system itself. The changes would affect the religious and ultra-Orthodox sector as well as so-called democratic schools.
Private schools such as the ones in Petah Tikva receive government and municipal funding. "The acceptance of children of Ethiopian descent is a key issue on the core level," Shoshani said. He added that he has met with the principals of the schools in question and conveyed the ministry's stance. The schools could be hit with sanctions if they refuse to comply.
The parents in Petah Tikva's parents' committee are threatening to keep their kids from school at the beginning of the new school year if immigrants are not evenly distributed among the city's schools.
The chairman of the city's forum of state-religious schools, Nir Orbach, said that "the city has taken significant steps," though a solution was not yet at hand.
======================================/
Share |
Last update - 05:00 31/08/2009
Freeze in Jerusalem too
By Akiva Eldar
Tags: Jerusalem, Obama, Israel
If there is any truth in the reports that came out of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's trip to Europe - that the United States agreed Israel can go on building in East Jerusalem - the headlines should have read "Obama has pulled out of the Middle East peace process."
Paraphrasing the famous statement by Moshe Dayan, that it is best to have Sharm el-Sheikh without peace than peace without Sharm el-Sheikh, it would be best for Obama to freeze the peace process and not thaw settlement building in East Jerusalem, than to thaw the process and leave Jerusalem out of the demand for a freeze on construction, except in Jewish neighborhoods.
From the point of view of the Arabs, and not only the Palestinians, it would be better for the United States to allow Israel to complete the construction of some homes in the settlement of Modi'in Ilit, which is on the border of the West Bank, than to give in to the flow of extreme right wingers into the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah, or Silwan (the City of David).
During the negotiations with Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert, the Palestinians agreed to exchange the territory of the settlements that are adjacent to the eastern side of the Green Line with territory on the western side of the line. On the other hand, the sensitive issue of sovereignty over the Old City of Jerusalem and the city's holy sites, as well as the fate of a quarter-million Palestinians who were "annexed" unilaterally into the State of Israel (as permanent residents) remains in dispute.
The American position has been and remains that East Jerusalem is occupied territory whose future will be decided in negotiations between the two sides. Like the other countries of the world, and the UN Security Council, the United States has never recognized Israel's decision to annex 64.4 square kilometers of the West Bank and join them to the 6.5 square kilometers that were part of Jerusalem's administrative authority under Jordanian rule.
Israel is the only country in the world that defines as "Jerusalem" the village Walja, which is 9.6 kilometers away from the administrative border of the Jordanian municipality. On the other hand, the village of Abu Dis, which is 1.5 kilometers from that same border, is considered by Israel to be in "Judea and Samaria," or the West Bank.
We think that if we say "united Jerusalem, the capital of Israel" frequently enough, the world will get used to the fact that this territory is ours (the semantics have led to a report on the Voice of Israel on the rise of Israeli exports to "Judea and Samaria").
It has not happened yet, and that is a good thing. Two U.S. presidents, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, did not approve the resolution passed by Congress in 1995, declaring that "unified Jerusalem" is the capital of Israel.
They stated that moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem will undermine the chances for a permanent resolution to the conflict, and thus harm the national security of the United States.
Unfortunately, both turned a blind eye to construction in the West Bank settlements and the Palestinian neighborhoods that Israel defines as "East Jerusalem."
Twelve years ago Israel had a prime minister who showed that when an American president is determined to freeze Jewish construction in East Jerusalem, even the most right-wing government falls in line.
His name: Benjamin Netanyahu. In July 1997 he decided to stop construction at a Jewish site in the heart of the neighborhood Ras al-Amud, and to evacuate the families who moved in. His justification: "The decision serves the unity of Jerusalem, the unity of the people and the continuation of the peace process."
Then-attorney general Elyakim Rubinstein, who is now a Supreme Court Justice, ruled, "If there is near certainty of violation of public order and endangering public safety, it is possible to block in advance the occupation of the homes, and even to evacuate them."
The head of the Shin Bet security service at the time, Ami Ayalon, warned the prime minister in a report that Jewish construction in the neighborhood would stir riots in the territories.
Since the current Palestinian leadership has renounced violence, it is possible that an American acquiescence to the continued Jewish penetration into Palestinian neighborhoods in East Jerusalem will pass peacefully.
However, a substantive change of such magnitude in the U.S. position regarding a national/religious issue that is so explosive would cause the negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, among other efforts, to crash and burn.
A precedent of this sort may bury the Arab Peace Initiative and with it normalization of ties with the Muslim world. We must hope that the news that Obama has backtracked on East Jerusalem is merely the wishful thinking of opponents to a compromise that come from the western part of the city.
======================================/
Share |
Last update - 05:00 31/08/2009
Freeze in Jerusalem too
By Akiva Eldar
Tags: Jerusalem, Obama, Israel
If there is any truth in the reports that came out of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's trip to Europe - that the United States agreed Israel can go on building in East Jerusalem - the headlines should have read "Obama has pulled out of the Middle East peace process."
Paraphrasing the famous statement by Moshe Dayan, that it is best to have Sharm el-Sheikh without peace than peace without Sharm el-Sheikh, it would be best for Obama to freeze the peace process and not thaw settlement building in East Jerusalem, than to thaw the process and leave Jerusalem out of the demand for a freeze on construction, except in Jewish neighborhoods.
From the point of view of the Arabs, and not only the Palestinians, it would be better for the United States to allow Israel to complete the construction of some homes in the settlement of Modi'in Ilit, which is on the border of the West Bank, than to give in to the flow of extreme right wingers into the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah, or Silwan (the City of David).
During the negotiations with Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert, the Palestinians agreed to exchange the territory of the settlements that are adjacent to the eastern side of the Green Line with territory on the western side of the line. On the other hand, the sensitive issue of sovereignty over the Old City of Jerusalem and the city's holy sites, as well as the fate of a quarter-million Palestinians who were "annexed" unilaterally into the State of Israel (as permanent residents) remains in dispute.
The American position has been and remains that East Jerusalem is occupied territory whose future will be decided in negotiations between the two sides. Like the other countries of the world, and the UN Security Council, the United States has never recognized Israel's decision to annex 64.4 square kilometers of the West Bank and join them to the 6.5 square kilometers that were part of Jerusalem's administrative authority under Jordanian rule.
Israel is the only country in the world that defines as "Jerusalem" the village Walja, which is 9.6 kilometers away from the administrative border of the Jordanian municipality. On the other hand, the village of Abu Dis, which is 1.5 kilometers from that same border, is considered by Israel to be in "Judea and Samaria," or the West Bank.
We think that if we say "united Jerusalem, the capital of Israel" frequently enough, the world will get used to the fact that this territory is ours (the semantics have led to a report on the Voice of Israel on the rise of Israeli exports to "Judea and Samaria").
It has not happened yet, and that is a good thing. Two U.S. presidents, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, did not approve the resolution passed by Congress in 1995, declaring that "unified Jerusalem" is the capital of Israel.
They stated that moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem will undermine the chances for a permanent resolution to the conflict, and thus harm the national security of the United States.
Unfortunately, both turned a blind eye to construction in the West Bank settlements and the Palestinian neighborhoods that Israel defines as "East Jerusalem."
Twelve years ago Israel had a prime minister who showed that when an American president is determined to freeze Jewish construction in East Jerusalem, even the most right-wing government falls in line.
His name: Benjamin Netanyahu. In July 1997 he decided to stop construction at a Jewish site in the heart of the neighborhood Ras al-Amud, and to evacuate the families who moved in. His justification: "The decision serves the unity of Jerusalem, the unity of the people and the continuation of the peace process."
Then-attorney general Elyakim Rubinstein, who is now a Supreme Court Justice, ruled, "If there is near certainty of violation of public order and endangering public safety, it is possible to block in advance the occupation of the homes, and even to evacuate them."
The head of the Shin Bet security service at the time, Ami Ayalon, warned the prime minister in a report that Jewish construction in the neighborhood would stir riots in the territories.
Since the current Palestinian leadership has renounced violence, it is possible that an American acquiescence to the continued Jewish penetration into Palestinian neighborhoods in East Jerusalem will pass peacefully.
However, a substantive change of such magnitude in the U.S. position regarding a national/religious issue that is so explosive would cause the negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, among other efforts, to crash and burn.
A precedent of this sort may bury the Arab Peace Initiative and with it normalization of ties with the Muslim world. We must hope that the news that Obama has backtracked on East Jerusalem is merely the wishful thinking of opponents to a compromise that come from the western part of the city.
======================================/
Last update - 23:32 30/08/2009
Ex-PM charged over cash envelopes, double-billing trips and cronyism
Former PM Olmert indicted in three corruption affairs
By Tomer Zarchin, Haaretz Correspondent
Tags: Israel news, Ehud Olmert
Former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was indicted Sunday in three corruption affairs, concluding months of investigations into cases allegedly conducted during his tenure as Jerusalem mayor and trade minister.
Attorney General Menachem Mazuz had announced earlier this month that Olmert would be charged in the Rishon Tours, cash envelopes and Investment Center affairs.
The State Prosecution on Sunday presented to the Jerusalem Magistrate's Court the indictment papers against both Olmert and his former bureau chief, Shula Zaken. The allegations surfaced when Olmert was still prime minister, eventually forcing him to step aside.
The charges against Olmert include fraud, breach of trust and failure to report income, the Justice Ministry said in a statement.
The Justice Ministry refused to detail the length of a potential sentence, but Moshe Negbi, an Israeli legal expert, said the maximum sentence on the fraud charge alone was five years.
The prosecution has asked that Olmert's trial be held before a panel of three justices, as is practice for political figures still in office.
Olmert's media adviser Amir Dan on Sunday defended his client's innocence, after the State Prosecution presented the court with indictment papers.
Dan accused the attorney general and prosecution of having no choice but to indict Olmert, after having forced him out of office.
"The court, meanwhile, is free of such considerations, and as such Olmert is convinced that he will once and for all be able to prove his innocence in court," said Dan.
"It is important to remember that the Cremieux and Bank Leumi affairs also began with giant headlines and dragged on for years and they both ended with nothing," said Dan referring to two other Olmert corruption affairs that were closed.
"These cases will end similarly," Dan added.
Mazuz a few weeks ago rejected a request by Olmert's attorneys for a pre-trial hearing, claiming their client had given up that right by refusing to attend another hearing.
The former prime minister had claimed then that the prosecution could not discuss the matters with an open mind, as they had already decided to press charges against his former travel coordinator, Rachel Risby-Raz, for her involvement in the Rishon Tours case.
The former prime minister has now been charged with accepting cash envelopes from American businessman Morris Talansky.
He is also suspected of illegally double-billing charities and a government ministry for the same flights he booked through Rishon Tours, sending them falsified receipts for travel expenses and using the surplus to finance personal and family trips abroad.
The Investments Center affair, which was first reported in Haaretz, concerned allegations that Olmert granted personal favors to his old law partner, Uri Messer, who was acting on behalf of a company, an act which would constitute a conflict of interest, breach of trust, and fraud.
The attorney general had earlier this summer decided to close a number of corruption cases against Olmert. In the most recent case, Mazuz cited lack of evidence over allegations that Olmert accepted some NIS 1 million in bribes in exchange for assisting the Laniado Hospital in Netanya.
The Laniado affair was the third case against Olmert to be dropped. The first closed was the Bank Leumi affair, in which Olmert was suspected of trying to help his friend, Australian real-estate magnate Frank Lowy, buy the controlling shares in Bank Leumi. Olmert, who was acting finance minister in 2005, was suspected of trying to change the tender conditions for buying the bank.
Late last month, Mazuz decided to close a separate corruption case against Olmert, involving the purchase of a home on Cremieux Street in Jerusalem. In that case as well, the attorney general cited lack of evidence.
======================================/
Last update - 19:16 30/08/2009
Is Al-Qaida opening a Gaza front to counter Hamas?
By Reuters
Tags: Gaza, Al-Qaida, Israel news
Explosions at two sensitive sites in the Gaza Strip over the weekend prompted speculation on Sunday that they were the work of Al-Qaida-aligned radicals opposed to the Palestinian enclave's Islamist rulers Hamas.
No credible claim of responsibility has been made.
Since Hamas seized control of the Gaza Strip in June 2007 by routing secular forces loyal to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, the Islamists have tended to blame occasional bombings and other attacks on Hamas targets on Abbas's Fatah party.
This time, however, suspicion has fallen on fundamentalist Muslims, or Salafis, whose agenda of global jihad, or holy war, against the West is at odds with Hamas's nationalist goals.
Hamas forces attacked a mosque in Rafah on August 14 after the leader of a group calling itself Jund Ansar Allah (Warriors of God) declared Islamic rule in the town on the border with Egypt.
Up to 28 people, including the leader, were killed. That spurred warnings of a reaction and speculation that conflict with Salafis could both complicate and foster Hamas's contact with the West.
The fighting was sparked by a rebellious sermon by the group's leader, and his dramatic death put an end to the greatest internal challenge to Hamas' rule since it took control of Gaza two years ago. It was the highest death toll in the territory since the Israel-Hamas war earlier this year.
Most Salafis share an agenda with Al-Qaida and believe Hamas broke with Islam by taking part in the 2006 Palestinian parliamentary election - an election which it won, sparking international sanctions. Since Hamas seized control of Gaza in 2007 from secular President Abbas, Salafis have criticised the Islamist movement for failing to implement Islamic law.
Though they may not have a clear hierarchical connection to Al-Qaida, they admire its leaders, Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri. Reliable data is scant but various groups may gather hundreds of fighters, including some trained and blooded in the ranks of Hamas but now disillusioned with the ruling movement.
The attackers hit two heavily guarded Hamas security compounds, one known to include a prison. The second, a residence of President Abbas, is also believed to be used now for detentions and interrogations. If Salafis were behind the bombing, they may be showing both their capabilities and a demand for dozens of imprisoned radicals to be freed.
Hamas has thousands of men under arms and easily outnumbers any other radical groups in the coastal territory. Nonetheless, radical ideology and an ability to blend into the population make the Salafis a difficult opponent when they avoid direct confrontation.
Another degree of irritation for Hamas is the Salafis' ability to attack Israel, provoking an Israeli reaction at times when Hamas may be trying to observe a truce.
Hamas officials say they are concentrating on "re-educating" captured radicals, hoping to win them over to a brand of political Islam more in line with Hamas's own principles.
======================================/
Last update - 19:16 30/08/2009
Is Al-Qaida opening a Gaza front to counter Hamas?
By Reuters
Tags: Gaza, Al-Qaida, Israel news
Explosions at two sensitive sites in the Gaza Strip over the weekend prompted speculation on Sunday that they were the work of Al-Qaida-aligned radicals opposed to the Palestinian enclave's Islamist rulers Hamas.
No credible claim of responsibility has been made.
Since Hamas seized control of the Gaza Strip in June 2007 by routing secular forces loyal to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, the Islamists have tended to blame occasional bombings and other attacks on Hamas targets on Abbas's Fatah party.
This time, however, suspicion has fallen on fundamentalist Muslims, or Salafis, whose agenda of global jihad, or holy war, against the West is at odds with Hamas's nationalist goals.
Hamas forces attacked a mosque in Rafah on August 14 after the leader of a group calling itself Jund Ansar Allah (Warriors of God) declared Islamic rule in the town on the border with Egypt.
Up to 28 people, including the leader, were killed. That spurred warnings of a reaction and speculation that conflict with Salafis could both complicate and foster Hamas's contact with the West.
The fighting was sparked by a rebellious sermon by the group's leader, and his dramatic death put an end to the greatest internal challenge to Hamas' rule since it took control of Gaza two years ago. It was the highest death toll in the territory since the Israel-Hamas war earlier this year.
Most Salafis share an agenda with Al-Qaida and believe Hamas broke with Islam by taking part in the 2006 Palestinian parliamentary election - an election which it won, sparking international sanctions. Since Hamas seized control of Gaza in 2007 from secular President Abbas, Salafis have criticised the Islamist movement for failing to implement Islamic law.
Though they may not have a clear hierarchical connection to Al-Qaida, they admire its leaders, Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri. Reliable data is scant but various groups may gather hundreds of fighters, including some trained and blooded in the ranks of Hamas but now disillusioned with the ruling movement.
The attackers hit two heavily guarded Hamas security compounds, one known to include a prison. The second, a residence of President Abbas, is also believed to be used now for detentions and interrogations. If Salafis were behind the bombing, they may be showing both their capabilities and a demand for dozens of imprisoned radicals to be freed.
Hamas has thousands of men under arms and easily outnumbers any other radical groups in the coastal territory. Nonetheless, radical ideology and an ability to blend into the population make the Salafis a difficult opponent when they avoid direct confrontation.
Another degree of irritation for Hamas is the Salafis' ability to attack Israel, provoking an Israeli reaction at times when Hamas may be trying to observe a truce.
Hamas officials say they are concentrating on "re-educating" captured radicals, hoping to win them over to a brand of political Islam more in line with Hamas's own principles.
======================================/
Share |
Last update - 09:52 31/08/2009
Will the Japanese Obama put pressure on Israel?
By Ben-Ami Shillony
Tags: Hamas, Japan, Israel News
The immediate consequence of the opposition's sweeping victory in Japan's elections yesterday will be psychological - it will create an atmosphere of optimism that could strengthen the economy. Such optimism will be fleeting if it is not followed by concrete results.
The victorious Democratic Party, headed by Yukio Hatoyama, has never before governed in Japan. It is seeking to be perceived as a center-left party.
Hatoyama has declared that his government will raise child allowances, expand welfare services and abolish highway tolls. He plans to fund these programs by shutting down "wasteful" projects, such as unnecessary highways and bridges.
These "wasteful" projects were designed to stimulate the Japanese economy, and eliminating them will harm various sectors and slow the country's recovery from recession.
The Democratic Party's plan to eliminate the employment of temporary industry workers, which would benefit employees but hurt industry, is expected to cause similar problems.
The new government will attempt to forge a more independent foreign policy, involving closer ties with China and other Asian countries and more independence from the United States.
Hatoyama has said he will end Japan's participation in anti-terrorism efforts in Afghanistan; Japan was involved in refueling American ships in the Indian Ocean.
Ending Japanese support for Western military operations in Afghanistan could cause tension with the United States and reduce American support for Japan in its confrontation with North Korea. It could also hurt U.S.-bound exports, which are essential for the Japanese economy's recovery. Toyota recently reported a 20 percent drop in worldwide car sales, while Mitsubishi's car sales were down 45 percent.
Withdrawing from American guardianship could also change Japanese policy toward Israel. Until now, Japan limited its support for the Palestinians to aiding economic projects, in keeping with American requests. The Hatoyama government is likely to take a more pro-Arab stance, such as by recognizing Hamas and making tougher demands of Israel, such as calling for an end to construction in the settlements. Such a position would be similar to the line taken by some European governments, and will not necessarily lead to a confrontation with the United States. The Obama administration may actually be pleased.
This January, the Israeli ambassador in Tokyo, Nissim Ben-Shitrit, participated in a Democratic Party convention. At the end of the convention, he met with Hatoyama. The party's Web site stated that Hatoyama expressed his deep concern over the Palestinian victims of Israel's Cast Lead operation in the Gaza Strip, and added that he hoped Israel would change its policies toward the Arab world, like American foreign policy had changed with the election of Barack Obama.
Hatoyama called himself the Japanese Obama in his election campaign, and said he would bring hoped-for change. When it comes to Israel, Obama and Hatoyama may coordinate efforts in ways Israel hasn't expected.
Ben-Ami Shillony is an emeritus professor of East Asian studies at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem
======================================/
Share |
Last update - 09:52 31/08/2009
Will the Japanese Obama put pressure on Israel?
By Ben-Ami Shillony
Tags: Hamas, Japan, Israel News
The immediate consequence of the opposition's sweeping victory in Japan's elections yesterday will be psychological - it will create an atmosphere of optimism that could strengthen the economy. Such optimism will be fleeting if it is not followed by concrete results.
The victorious Democratic Party, headed by Yukio Hatoyama, has never before governed in Japan. It is seeking to be perceived as a center-left party.
Hatoyama has declared that his government will raise child allowances, expand welfare services and abolish highway tolls. He plans to fund these programs by shutting down "wasteful" projects, such as unnecessary highways and bridges.
These "wasteful" projects were designed to stimulate the Japanese economy, and eliminating them will harm various sectors and slow the country's recovery from recession.
The Democratic Party's plan to eliminate the employment of temporary industry workers, which would benefit employees but hurt industry, is expected to cause similar problems.
The new government will attempt to forge a more independent foreign policy, involving closer ties with China and other Asian countries and more independence from the United States.
Hatoyama has said he will end Japan's participation in anti-terrorism efforts in Afghanistan; Japan was involved in refueling American ships in the Indian Ocean.
Ending Japanese support for Western military operations in Afghanistan could cause tension with the United States and reduce American support for Japan in its confrontation with North Korea. It could also hurt U.S.-bound exports, which are essential for the Japanese economy's recovery. Toyota recently reported a 20 percent drop in worldwide car sales, while Mitsubishi's car sales were down 45 percent.
Withdrawing from American guardianship could also change Japanese policy toward Israel. Until now, Japan limited its support for the Palestinians to aiding economic projects, in keeping with American requests. The Hatoyama government is likely to take a more pro-Arab stance, such as by recognizing Hamas and making tougher demands of Israel, such as calling for an end to construction in the settlements. Such a position would be similar to the line taken by some European governments, and will not necessarily lead to a confrontation with the United States. The Obama administration may actually be pleased.
This January, the Israeli ambassador in Tokyo, Nissim Ben-Shitrit, participated in a Democratic Party convention. At the end of the convention, he met with Hatoyama. The party's Web site stated that Hatoyama expressed his deep concern over the Palestinian victims of Israel's Cast Lead operation in the Gaza Strip, and added that he hoped Israel would change its policies toward the Arab world, like American foreign policy had changed with the election of Barack Obama.
Hatoyama called himself the Japanese Obama in his election campaign, and said he would bring hoped-for change. When it comes to Israel, Obama and Hatoyama may coordinate efforts in ways Israel hasn't expected.
Ben-Ami Shillony is an emeritus professor of East Asian studies at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem
======================================/
Weekend Edition
August 28-30, 2009
CounterPunch Diary
Teddy Kennedy the Hollow Champion
By ALEXANDER COCKBURN
Teddy Kennedy's disasters were vivid. His legislative triumphs, draped in this week's obituaries with respectful homage, were far less colorful but they were actually devastating for the very constituencies – working people, organized labor – whose champion he claimed to be.
He had the most famous car accident in political history when he drove off a wooden bridge on Chappaquiddick Island in July 1969, saying later that he had failed in several attempts to dive down 10ft to rescue Mary Jo Kopechne, a former aide of his dead brother Robert. She was in the back seat and drowned.
Ted quit the scene and called in standby Kennedy speechwriters instead of the police, a misdemeanor which cost him a two-month suspended sentence and any chance of ever following his brother Jack into the White House.
He made only one overt bid for the presidency and that was a colorful disaster too. He challenged the Democratic incumbent, Jimmy Carter, then seeking re-election in 1980. After three years, the left in the Democratic Party was bitterly disappointed in Carter's cautious centrism and Kennedy placed himself in the left's vanguard, declaring in a famous speech that "sometimes a party must sail against the wind".
In those days I was reporting on national politics for the Village Voice and Rolling Stone and covered Kennedy's bid. It got off to a shaky start when Roger Mudd of NBC, a well-known political reporter and TV newscaster, asked Ted on prime time why he wanted to be president. The thirty seconds of silence that followed this easy lob didn't help Kennedy's chances.
The campaign plane shot backwards and forwards across America, seeking photo opportunities. On one typical morning we left Washington DC at 6am and headed for the rustbelt where Kennedy stood outside a shuttered Pittsburgh steel mill and pledged to get the steel industry back on its feet. We shot west to Nebraska so Kennedy could stand in front of a corn silo and swear allegiance to the cause – utterly doomed - of the small family farmer. Then we doubled back to New York so he could stand on a street corner in a slum neighborhood in the Bronx and promise a better deal for urban blacks and Hispanics.
I asked one of Kennedy's campaign people why they didn't simply equip a studio in Washington with the necessary backdrops – steel mill, silo, urban wasteland – but he said it wouldn't be honest. As things were, the locations we flew to may have been genuine, but the campaign pledges were as dishonest as a studio backdrop, which is why Kennedy – bellowing out his speeches like a mammoth stuck in a swamp - sounded utterly fake.
By 1980 the die was cast. Disdaining the leftward option offered by George McGovern in 1972, the Democratic Party had thrown in its lot decisively with Wall Street, and the big players across the American corporate landscape. The labor unions and the other foot-soldier constituencies of the Party, would be flung rhetorical bouquets with decreasing fervor every four years.
Though the obituarists have glowingly evoked Kennedy's 46-year stint in the US Senate and, as 'the last liberal', his mastery of the legislative process, they miss the all-important fact that it was out of Kennedy's Senate office that came two momentous slabs of legislation that signalled the onset of the neo-liberal era: deregulation of trucking and aviation. They were a disaster for organized labor and the working conditions and pay of people in those industries.
The theorists of deregulation were Stephen Breyer who was Kennedy's chief counsel on the Senate Judiciary Committee and Alfred Kahn, out of Cornell. Prominent on Kennedy’s dereg team was David Boies. Breyer now sits on the US Supreme Court, an unswerving shill for the corporate sector.
In the mid to late 1970s these Kennedy rent-a-thinkers began to tout deregulation as the answer to low productivity and bureaucratic and corporate inertia. Famous at that time was a screed by Breyer, then a Harvard Law School professor, quantifying such things as environmental pollution in terms of assessable and fungible “risks” which could be bought and sold in the market place. (The Natural Resources Defense Council, adorned by Ted’s nephew, Robert Kennedy Jr., has long espoused this disastrous approach.)
The two prongs of Kennedy’s deregulatory attack – later decorated with the political label “neo-liberalism” – were aimed at airlines and trucking, and Kennedy’s man, Alfred Kahn was duly installed by Jimmy Carter at the Civil Aeronautics Board to introduce the cleansing winds of competition into the industry. By and large, airline deregulation went down well with the press and, for a time, with the public, who rejoiced in the bargains offered by the small fry such as People’s Express, and by the big fry striking back. The few critics who said that within a few years the nation would be left with five or six airlines, oligopoly and higher fares, were mostly ignored.
No one ever really wrote about the terrible effects of trucking deregulation outside the left press. It was certainly the most ferocious anti-labor move of the 1970s, with Kennedy as the driving force. Some of Kennedy’s aides promptly reaped the fruits of their legislative labors, leaving the Hill to make money hand over fist trying to break unions on behalf of Frank Lorenzo, the Texan entrepreneur who ran the Texas Air Corporation and its properties, Continental Airlines and its subsidiary, Eastern.
Did Kennedy fight, might and main, against NAFTA? No. As Steve Early relates in his piece on this site today, he was for it and helped Clinton ratify the job-losing Agreement. Then he put his shoulder behind GATT, parent of the World Trade Agreement.
We also have Kennedy to thank for 'No Child Left Behind' – the nightmarish education act pushed through in concert with Bush Jr's White House, that condemns children to a treadmill of endless tests contrived as "national standards".
And it was Kennedy who was the prime force behind the Hate Crimes Bill, aka the Matthew Shepard Act, by dint of which America is well on its way to making it illegal to say anything nasty about gays, Jews, blacks and women. "Hate speech," far short of any direct incitement to violence, is on the edge of being criminalized, with the First Amendment going the way of the dodo.
The deadly attacks on the working class and on organized labor are Ted Kennedy’s true monument. But as much as his brothers Jack and Bobby he was adept at persuading the underdogs that he was on their side. If it hadn’t been for Kennedy, a lot more people would have health coverage . In 1971 Nixon, heading into his relection bid, put up the legislative ancestor of all recent Democratic proposals, but Kennedy shot it down, preferring to have this as his campaign plank sometime in the political future.
After reelection, Nixon did promote a health plan in his 1974 State of the Union speech, with a call for universal access to health insurance. He followed up with his Comprehensive Health Insurance Act on February 6, 1974. Nixon said his plan would build on existing employer-sponsored insurance plans and would provide government subsidies to the self-employed and small businesses to ensure universal access to health insurance. Kennedy went through the motions of cooperation, but in the end the AFL-CIO, with a covert nudge from Kennedy, killed the bill because Nixon was vanishing under the Watergate scandal and the Democrats did not want to hand the President and the Republicans one of their signature issues. Now the Republicans scream “socialism” at exactly what Nixon proposed and Kennedy killed off 38 years ago, in 1971.
To this day there are deluded souls who argue that Jack was going to pull US troops out of Vietnam and that is why he was killed; that Bobby, who worked for Roy Cohn and supervised a "Murder Inc" in the Caribbean, was really and truly on the side of the angels; that Ted was the mighty champion of the working people, even though he helped deliver them into the inferno of neoliberalism.
By his crucial endorsement last year he helped give them Obama too, now holidaying six miles from Chappaquiddick, on Martha's Vineyard, another salesman for the inferno. But because his mishaps were so dramatic, few remember quite how toxic his political “triumphs” were for those who now foolishly mourn him as their lost leader.
A Couple of Trumpet Blasts
It was here that CounterPuncher Pam Martens published her exposé of the Free State Movement’s plans to take over New Hampshire.
Guess where William “It’s Time to Water the Tree of Liberty” Kostric recently moved to? Yes, Kostric and his arsenal have settled in the Granite State – one of of the Free State Movement’s footsoldiers. As always, Pam is ahead of the curve.
And it was here in CounterPunch that group of Latin Americanists across America published their Open Letter to Kenneth Roth, director of Human Rights Watch, protesting HRW’s sudden silence on the coup d’etat in Honduras. Within a couple of days an embarrassed HRW clambered off the fence.
Exclusive to CounterPunch newsletter subscribers!
In our latest newsletter, published this weekend, find Eugenia Tsao’s brilliant report on the booming global trade in Psychotherapeutics. As third world neoliberal economies plunge millions into hunger and desperation, sales of Prozac and other antipsychotics boom.
Take the case of Argentina. Tsao writes:
“Within the first five years of the IMF’s ravaging of the Argentinean economy in the early 1990s, total pharmaceutical revenues rose 70 per cent: … spooked by the proliferation of unlicensed copies of their patented compounds, multinationals like GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer ramped up their efforts to encourage Argentinean psychiatrists to prescribe Paxil and Zoloft by sending them on free trips to prestigious North American and European scientific congresses (otherwise unaffordable for most researchers in the global South) and supplying them with free samples of brand-name product (cherished commodities in underfunded state hospitals).”
First World to Third: Don’t organize against imperial and local oppression. Blame yourself for being crazy and take Prozac.
In the newsletter subscribers will also find Elyssa Pachico’s amazing account of how the US Patents office helped a Colorado man claim ownership of the Mexican mayacoba bean. Pachico reviews the long string of patent piracies in recent years in which even ayahuasca, the psychedelic used by Amerindian shamans for centuries, has been the target of First World biopiracy.
Also in this latest newsletter you can find co-editor Alexander Cockburn’s detailed account of how al-Megrahi, the Libyan with terminal prostate cancer recently sent home from a Scottish prison amid a huge and vindictive uproar in the U.S., was framed in a successful bid by the U.S. and U.K. to pin the Lockerbie bombing of Panam Flight 103 on Qaddafi’s Libya.
Subscribe today!
A shorter version of the first item appears in The First Post.
Alexander Cockburn can be reached at alexandercockburn@asis.com
======================================/
Weekend Edition
August 28-30, 2009
Growls From the Wake in Massachusetts
Kennedy's Sins Against Labor
By STEVE EARLY
I was raised, like most Irish-Catholics, not to speak ill of the dead—at least while the wake is still underway. Of course, the affliction known as “Irish Alzheimers” exerts a powerful tug in the opposite direction. Forgetting everything except the grudges keeps you focused on those parts of a departed politician’s legacy that won’t be highlighted from the pulpit or, in Ted Kennedy’s case, in fulsome obituaries run as front-page news stories, op-ed pieces, editorials, and internet encomia throughout the nation.
Here’s my own view of the senator. I was not a fan of Ted when he was alive and expressed this dissenting opinion, on several occasions, in our local rag, The Boston Globe, after Kennedy’s reccurring lapses as a friend of the working class became too painful to ignore. Ted Kennedy was not on labor’s side when key public policy shifts were engineered that disastrously weakened and marginalized American unions. After helping to deliver these legislative hammer blows, Ted was quick to offer his hand to a labor movement now lying flat on its back. But forms of assistance like boosting the minimum wage, helping immigrants, securing local defense plant jobs, or co-sponsoring the Employee Free Choice Act have hardly compensated for the ravages of “neoliberalism” that Kennedy aided and abetted. In the case of EFCA, any fundamental repair of federal labor law gets more unlikely every day, even if our vacant Senate seat gets filled sooner, rather than later.
Of course, all who speak officially for “labor” would strongly disagree with this assessment. They are busy heaping praise on our fallen champion, as labor’s best friend ever. Compared to centrist Democrats who are quick to abandon workers at the drop of a campaign donation, Ted did appear to be the true “liberal lion” and patron of union causes everywhere. But here’s what I remember about the same Ted Kennedy, who sided with corporate America in its late 1970s drive for deregulation, who was MIA during the biggest anti-concession battle of the 1980s, who pushed trade liberalization in the 1990s, and who settled short on health care reform for the last several decades. (By the usual count at Fenway Park, it’s three strikes and you’re out. Being a Kennedy, Ted always got an extra pitch—so, in the box score below, the strikes against him number four.)
An Architect of Deregulation
In several key industries—trucking, the airlines, and telecom--nothing has undermined union membership and bargaining power more than de-regulation. Kennedy embraced de-regulation with gusto and, despite his other differences with Jimmy Carter thirty years ago, helped ram through industry restructuring harmful to hundreds of thousands of workers and their union contracts. By 1985, as Kim Moody describes in U.S. Labor in Trouble and Transition, the number of workers covered by the Teamsters’ biggest trucking contract had been halved. Today, fewer than 100,000 work under the National Master Freight Agreement (NMFA)—down from 450,000 before Carter and Kennedy transformed the role of the Interstate Commerce Commission and codified that regulatory change via the Motor Carrier Act of 1980. The business-backed policy agenda “that would become known as ‘Reaganomics’ or more generally as neoliberalism,” had its roots in the Carter Administration, Moody points out. Two of its key objectives were deregulation and free trade; the first having been accomplished under Carter, the second was pursued with equal fervor and further Kennedy legislative vigor after Clinton became president.
A No-Show At NYNEX
Twenty years ago this month, 60,000 telephone workers in New York and New England began a bruising tussle with our regional phone company, then known as NYNEX. Two workers died, directly or indirectly, as a result of this strike. Hundreds were arrested, fired, or suspended (discipline that was, in some cases, later modified or reversed). Rallies of up to 15,000 people filled the streets of Boston, as IBEW and CWA members demanded “Health Care For All, Not Health Cuts At NYNEX,” and explicitly tied their fight against give-backs to political agitation for national health insurance. To break the strike, management cut off medical coverage for all strikers and their families.
Everyone involved in this struggle assumed, initially, that Ted Kennedy’s long-standing advocacy of health care reform would make him a logical ally. Yet, despite repeated union overtures and invitations, Kennedy failed to make a single picket-line appearance or speak out on the strikers’ behalf in any way. Kennedy’s no-show role became so obvious mid-way through the walk-out that union members booed the very mention of his name at one mass rally in Boston. Finally, after four months, the strikers prevailed. To this day in the northeast, at the company now known as Verizon, workers make no premium contributions for health care, for either individual or family coverage. Although he was more supportive of labor at Verizon recently, Kennedy did nothing to “hold the line in ’89”—or help us use that strike to build the movement for national health insurance.
A Free Trade Recidivist
Kennedy’s disconnection from local concerns, whether labor-oriented or not, became a political liability when he ran for re-election a few years later. Early in his 1994 campaign against businessman Mitt Romney, Ted was not doing well in the polls. It began to look like Newt Gingrich’s mid-term Republican surge might take Kennedy out too. Massachusetts unions had good reason for further disenchantment with their senior senator; over labor’s strenuous objections, he had just helped Bill Clinton get the job-killing North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) ratified on Capitol Hill, while labor law reform was being buried in presidential study commission. Nevertheless, trade unionists rallied around the incumbent and helped torpedo Romney’s campaign, by exposing the union-busting record of Bain Capital, his private equity firm.
After Kennedy was returned to office with only 58 per cent of the vote (his smallest margin ever), I pointed out in a Globe op-ed piece that Ted now had a chance to “repay his debt to labor.” He could do this by bucking President Clinton and voting against the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) during the lame-duck session of Congress about to begin. As a post-election concession to his labor supporters, Kennedy convened a one-man Senate hearing in Boston so local manufacturing unions could air their objections to GATT. As one of many labor witnesses, I trooped up to Beacon Hill to inform Ted that GATT, like the already approved NAFTA, “will mean more plant closings, downward pressure on wages, health benefit cuts, and loss of union rights.” Kennedy seemed irritated about having to be there at all. He interrupted and strongly objected to my insistence that GATT restrictions on “non-tariff barriers to trade” would lead to weaker protections for workers, particularly child laborers in the Third World. A Boston central labor council leader made the angriest and most memorable speech of the day. He told Kennedy that NAFTA was like “a knife you have stuck into the back of organized labor--and now you can either pull it out or plunge it in further.”
Kennedy returned to Washington and, one week later, stuck the dagger in deeper. He voted for GATT, which created the World Trade Organization, and accelerated the trend toward “corporate globalization” already underway regionally, thanks to NAFTA. Running for president last year, even Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton expressed belated concern about the fate of workers’ rights and environmental safeguards in various free trade deals. Kennedy, however, had no remorse, regrets, or doubts about trade liberalization--despite its negative impact on labor, here and abroad.
A Single-Payer Defector
In a cover piece for Newsweek last month, entitled “The Cause of My Life,” Kennedy proudly recalled his backing for Medicare in 1965. After that vote, he continued to advocate expanded public health insurance coverage for another decade or so. But just as more Americans—like the NYNEX strikers in 1989—began to gravitate toward his “Medicare for all” position, Kennedy abandoned it. As he explained in Newsweek, “I came to believe that we’d have to give up on the idea of a government run, single-payer system if we wanted to get universal care.”
Kennedy’s badly-timed surrender had the effect of becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. No matter how many more recruits the single-payer movement generated, political insiders deemed it “off the table.” And what better evidence was there that national health insurance was “unachievable” than its one-time champion finally seeing the light and settling for less, in Massachusetts and nationally. Meanwhile, opportunities to build a stronger movement for real reform—like major strikes against health care cost shifting—were ignored, even in Kennedy’s own backyard.
In 1993, for example, Kennedy embraced Hillary Clinton’s ill-fated “managed competition” plan, helping to deflate grassroots organizing for social insurance instead. He did lend his name to a 2006 bill to expand Medicare coverage but devoted most of his time, lately to promoting the Massachusetts model of subsidized private insurance coverage, which utilizes individual and employer mandates to prop up our dysfunctional system of job-based benefits. Cooked up as a bi-partisan solution with Republican governor Mitt Romney (who now criticizes the Massachusetts plan), this budget-busting scheme is the current inspiration for “Obamacare.”
Despite all of the above, Ted Kennedy’s legacy will continue to shine in the eyes of many. The bar for determining what constitutes a “friend of labor” these days is only inches off the ground. In this period of mourning, let’s remember that political sins are better forgiven than forgotten. The act of forgetting just sets the stage for future failures by labor to hold other allies—including those far less revered -- accountable either.
Steve Early was a Boston-area Kennedy constituent from 1980 to 2009. During that time, he was also a New England telecom strike organizer, national health insurance advocate, and union campaigner against free trade. He is the author of Embedded With Organized Labor,
from Monthly Review Press, and can be reached at Lsupport@aol.com
======================================/
Weekend Edition
August 28-30, 2009
Michael Jackson's Crossover Dream
Trapped Again
By DAVE MARSH
Once my mind cleared after word reached me that Michael Jackson had died, I wondered how much my 1985 book Trapped: Michael Jackson and the Crossover Dream was going for on Amazon ($14 used; $100 new) and came across a review from '85 that said, "Marsh...sees Jackson as a Peter Pan figure, afraid of responsibility, trapped inside a self-created fantasy world where he struggles to remain free from such adult realities as sex, politics, and race." Sounded good, so I read the last chapter for the first time in a long time. It holds up. So we offer it to you here.—D.M.
The Victory tour crashed into the headlines with more fanfare than any pop music event since the Beatles hit the States. It skulked off, fading away in embarrassment and something akin to shame. The stories about Kansas City made the front pages; the ones about Los Angeles were buried back in the amusement section, filler for a slow news Monday. The two hundred out-of-town journalists who had besieged the Jacksons’ opening night were reduced by the end to a visible complement of two. The tickets that were supposed to be so hard to get at the beginning were as easy to find as BMWs in Westwood in the final days.
Meantime, Michael Jackson, the puzzle seeking its own answer, was all but discarded, tossed aside like a contraption that had outlasted its fad—not broken just sort of boring. If he did something (U.S.A. for Africa, Madame Tussaud’s) the media would cover, but dutifully, without any of the hysterical urgency that had attended the heyday of Thriller. If he did nothing, that was all right, too. Maybe it was even preferable. The self-inflating machinery of hype that had pumped him up into the Biggest Star in the World had finally worn itself out…at least on this one topic.
Left was a sour smell, a bitter taste in the mouth, the aftershock of cheat and frustration, a nasty, nagging mood. What was most curious about these sensations was their familiarity. Had we known all along that anyone who flew so far beyond our expectations as Michael Jackson would someday simply disappear, clean out of sight, returning only episodically, like Halley’s Comet?
No, that’s not it at all. Michael Jackson has been removed from orbit. That doesn’t mean he has lost a shred of his musical talent or an ounce of his showbiz savvy. It does not mean that he has wearied of public attention and gone into retreat. It simply means that the story of Michael Jackson has burned out, that “everybody” is ready to move on to the next thing: Prince’s movie, Bitburg, Bruce Springsteen’s wedding, a famine in Africa. It really doesn’t matter. Soon enough, these things too will run through their cycle of fascination and the headlines will recede deeper and deeper into the back pages, to be replaced by newer pop stars, scandals and outrages against humanity. Of course, in the cycle of these things, there is always the chance that Michael Jackson will reappear. A “comeback” is always an interesting spectacle.
In this environment, no story is truly enduring and all stories are very much the same, since all have bang-up beginnings and their conclusions just sort of fade away. Think of Vietnam and Watergate, the central events of American life in the past ten years. When did the war end? When our last troops left or when Saigon fell? Where did Watergate stop? When Nixon was pardoned or the last trial was complete?
The answer is that those stories aren’t over, probably because truly completing them would mean remaking the world and ourselves much more drastically than most story-tellers care to imagine. Nevertheless, the stories linger, hovering just around the corner or rattling around in the attic, locked up like nineteenth century madmen. Either way, they’re gone but not forgotten. The biggest of them lurk into ghosts, haunting our dreams, twinging always at our conscience.
In the context of Vietnam and Watergate, the unfinished story of Michael Jackson seems small and superficial. If he were just a pop singer making a bigger score than usual, that might be true. But Michael Jackson is one thing before he is a singer or a success or a star or anything else. He is a black person in America. As a result, he set some older chains to clanking, stirred some ancient ghosts, incited some venerable dreams.
The ghosts of slavery and racism are four hundred years old but their power is fresh and strong. The dreams he incited are equally old—the fantastic hope that we can somehow be brought together long enough to lay those ghosts to rest. Give the dreams their names, too: Emancipation, integration, liberation. Or call them with the term show business now uses: Crossover.
But never forget: The similarity between the crossover dream and the hope embodied by the idea of integration is deceptive. Their roots are identical, but their aspirations are polar. Integration implies the liberation not just of an entire people but of a whole society, while the practitioners of crossover ask only to receive individual liberties. It’s the difference between Jackie Robinson, whose personal emancipation within the world of baseball inspired not only black Americans but the whole country, and Michael Jackson, whose triumphs in the world of popular music were so private that they were ultimately never shared with anyone and as a result, curdled, turned sour and evaporated into a sickly residue of their original potential .
This consequence was so predictable that it now feels inevitable. Like anyone indulging in the crossover dream, Michael Jackson played a dangerous game. He imagined himself capable of receiving an exemption from the visits of the horrible ghosts of American racism. This is an exceedingly dangerous illusion, for in the end, the ghosts will always come to call, all you’ve done is condemn yourself to a role as a villain or a fool. There is no exemption, not only because of what fame such as Michael Jackson’s stirs among the spirits of the past but because of what it awakens among the living.
Of course, there are those who would like to pretend that time has healed all wounds, that the scores are settled and it’s time to move on. Michael’s dreams of exemption—like all crossover dreams—play right into such hands. So Michael was held up as an example, living proof that the system worked and things weren’t so bad after all.
This version of the crossover dream isn’t just a fiction, it’s an outright lie. So the minute it showed a crack in its surface, it had to be discarded, swept under the rug, superseded by new distractions. As long as Michael Jackson was simply The Thriller, a disembodied performer on vinyl, a flickering image on the TV screen, his image could hold any meaning assigned to it. The moment that he headed out for the real world, taking the stage as a figure of flesh and blood, the crossover dream cracked wide open and where once unity proudly beckoned, now only divisions were apparent. It was time to go.
In a sense, Michael Jackson walked away intact. He retains a huge audience and a bankroll unrivaled by any popular musician in history. He was well-positioned to begin his long-sought career as a moviemaker. But if it is ever possible or permissible to feel pity for a person who has been given so much, it was in those months when the worm turned and he became, not just a figure of occasional ridicule or the target of various hostilities, but washed-up, yesterday’s news, subject to the most dread of all superstar critiques: “Who cares?”
Can Michael Jackson escape this fate? Consider that, if his next album sells, let’s say, fifteen million copies, he will have failed—not only by the false standards of the music industry but by his own criteria. If it sells a more reasonable five or ten million, God only knows the reaction—Michael’s or the world’s.
Suppose the opposite. Imagine that, against all odds, Michael Jackson’s next project—be it film or music or something else entirely—reflects what he learned in the cauldron of Thriller and Victory. Dream that it presents him as the master of a new kind of crossover, presenting with new maturity his perspective as the master and victim of fame and notoriety. In the face of this crossover dream, the question would fall away from him—whether he sold five million or fifty—and descend back upon the rest of us, inhabitants of the world of unfinished stories and restless ghosts. If Michael Jackson managed this kind of crossover, one answer would still be left outstanding. Is there anyone left who can hear him? (Dave Marsh, December 1985)
Dave Marsh (along with Lee Ballinger) edits Rock & Rap Confidential, one of CounterPunch's favorite newsletters, now available for free by emailing: rockrap@aol.com. Marsh's definitive and monumental biography of Bruce Springsteen has just been reissued, with 12,000 new words, under the title Two Hearts. Marsh can be reached at: marsh6@optonline.net
============================================================================//..
Israeli Organ Harvesting
By ALISON WEIR
Last week Sweden’s largest daily newspaper published an article containing shocking material: testimony and circumstantial evidence indicating that Israelis may have been harvesting internal organs from Palestinian prisoners without consent for many years.
Worse yet, some of the information reported in the article suggests that in some instances Palestinians may have been captured with this macabre purpose in mind.
In the article, “Our sons plundered for their organs,” veteran journalist Donald Bostrom writes that Palestinians “harbor strong suspicions against Israel for seizing young men and having them serve as the country’s organ reserve – a very serious accusation, with enough question marks to motivate the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to start an investigation about possible war crimes.”1/
An army of Israeli officials and apologists immediately went into high gear, calling both Bostrom and the newspaper’s editors “anti-Semitic.” The Israeli foreign minister was reportedly “aghast” and termed it “a demonizing piece of blood libel.” An Israeli official called it “hate porn.”
Commentary magazine wrote that the story was “merely the tip of the iceberg in terms of European funded and promoted anti-Israel hate.” Numerous people likened the article to the medieval “blood libel,” (widely refuted stories that Jews killed people to use their blood in religious rituals). Even some pro-Palestinian writers joined in the criticism, expressing skepticism.
The fact is, however, that substantiated evidence of public and private organ trafficking and theft, and allegations of worse, have been widely reported for many years. Given such context, the Swedish charges become far more plausible than might otherwise be the case and suggest that an investigation could well turn up significant information.
Below are a few examples of previous reports on this topic.
Israel’s first heart transplant
Israel’s very first, historic heart transplant used a heart removed from a living patient without consent or consulting his family.
In December 1968 a man named Avraham Sadegat (the New York Times seems to give his name as A Savgat) (2) died two days after a stroke, even though his family had been told he was “doing well.”
After initially refusing to release his body, the Israeli hospital where he was being treated finally turned the man’s body over to his family. They discovered that his upper body was wrapped in bandages; an odd situation, they felt, for someone who had suffered a stroke.
When they removed the bandages, they discovered that the chest cavity was stuffed with bandages, and the heart was missing.
During this time, the headline-making Israeli heart transplant had occurred. After their initial shock, the man’s wife and brother began to put the two events together and demanded answers.
The hospital at first denied that Sadegat’s heart had been used in the headline-making transplant, but the family raised a media storm and eventually applied to three cabinet ministers. Finally, weeks later and after the family had signed a document promising not to sue, the hospital admitted that Sadagat’s heart had been used.
The hospital explained that it had abided by Israeli law, which allowed organs to be harvested without the family's consent. (3) (The United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime includes the extraction of organs in its definition of human exploitation.)
Indications that the removal of Sadagat’s heart was the actual cause of death went unaddressed.
Director of forensic medicine on missing organs
A 1990 article in the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs entitled “Autopsies and Executions” by Mary Barrett reports on the grotesque killings of young Palestinians. It includes an interview with Dr. Hatem Abu Ghazalch, the former chief health official for the West Bank under Jordanian administration and director of forensic medicine and autopsies.
Barrett asks him about “the widespread anxiety over organ thefts which has gripped Gaza and the West Bank since the intifada began in December of 1987.”
He responded:
"There are indications that for one reason or another, organs, especially eyes and kidneys, were removed from the bodies during the first year or year and a half. There were just too many reports by credible people for there to be nothing happening. If someone is shot in the head and comes home in a plastic bag without internal organs, what will people assume?” (4)
Mysterious Scottish death
In 1998 a Scot named Alisdair Sinclair died under questionable circumstances while in Israeli custody at Ben Gurion airport.
His family was informed of the death and, according to a report in J Weekly, “…told they had three weeks to come up with about $4,900 to fly Sinclair's corpse home. [Alisdair’s brother] says the Israelis seemed to be pushing a different option: burying Sinclair in a Christian cemetery in Israel, at a cost of about $1,300.”
The family scraped up the money, brought the body home, and had an autopsy performed at the University of Glasgow. It turned out that Alisdair’s heart and a tiny throat bone were missing. At this point the British Embassy filed a complaint with Israel.
The J report states:
“A heart said to be Sinclair's was subsequently repatriated to Britain, free of charge. James wanted the [Israeli] Forensic Institute to pay for a DNA test to confirm that this heart was indeed their brother's, but the Institute's director, Professor Jehuda Hiss refused, citing the prohibitive cost, estimated by some sources at $1,500.”
Despite repeated requests from the British Embassy for the Israeli pathologist's and police reports, Israeli officials refused to release either. (5,6,7)
Israeli government officials raise questions
Palestinian journalist Khalid Amayreh reports in an article in CCUN:
“In January, 2002, an Israeli cabinet minister tacitly admitted that organs taken from the bodies of Palestinian victims might have been used for transplants in Jewish patients without the knowledge of the Palestinian victims’ families.
“The minister, Nessim Dahan, said in response to a question by an Arab Knesset member that he couldn’t deny or confirm that organs of Palestinian youths and children killed by the Israeli army were taken out for transplants or scientific research.
“‘I couldn’t say for sure that something like that didn’t happen.’”
Amayreh writes that the Knesset member who posed the question said that he “had received ‘credible evidence proving that Israeli doctors at the forensic institute of Abu Kabir extracted such vital organs as the heart, kidneys, and liver from the bodies of Palestinian youth and children killed by the Israeli army in Gaza and the West Bank.” (8)
Israel’s chief pathologist removed from post for stealing body parts
For a number of years there were allegations that Israel’s leading pathologist was stealing body parts. In 2001 the Israeli national news service reported:
“… the parents of soldier Ze’ev Buzgallo who was killed in a Golan Heights military training accident, are filing a petition with the High Court of Justice calling for the immediate suspension of Dr. Yehuda Hiss and that criminal charges be filed against him. Hiss serves as the director of the Abu Kabir Forensic Institute….According to the parents, the body of their son was used for medical experimentation without their consent, experiments authorized by Hiss. (9)
In 2002 the service reported:
“The revelation of illegally stored body parts in the Abu Kabir Forensic Institute has prompted MK Anat Maor, chairman of the Knesset Science Committee, to demand the immediate suspension of the director, Prof. Yehuda Hiss."
Alisdair Sinclair’s death had first alerted authorities to Hiss’s malfeasance in 1998, though nothing was done for years. The Forward reported:
“In 2001, an Israeli Health Ministry investigation found that Hiss had been involved for years in taking body parts, such as legs, ovaries and testicles, without family permission during autopsies, and selling them to medical schools for use in research and training. He was appointed chief pathologist in 1988. Hiss was never charged with any crime, but in 2004 he was forced to step down from running the state morgue, following years of complaints.” (10)
Harvesting kidneys from impoverished communities
According to the Economist, a kidney racket flourished in South Africa between 2001 and 2003. “Donors were recruited in Brazil, Israel and Romania with offers of $5,000-20,000 to visit Durban and forfeit a kidney. The 109 recipients, mainly Israelis, each paid up to $120,000 for a “transplant holiday”; they pretended they were relatives of the donors and that no cash changed hands.” (11)
In 2004 a legislative commission in Brazil reported, “At least 30 Brazilians have sold their kidneys to an international human organ trafficking ring for transplants performed in South Africa, with Israel providing most of the funding.”
According to an IPS report: “The recipients were mostly Israelis, who receive health insurance reimbursements of 70,000 to 80,000 dollars for life-saving medical procedures performed abroad.”
IPS reports:
The Brazilians were recruited in Brazil’s most impoverished neighbourhoods and were paid $10,000 per kidney, “but as ‘supply’ increased, the payments fell as low as 3,000 dollars.” The trafficking had been organized by a retired Israeli police officer, who said “he did not think he was committing a crime, given that the transaction is considered legal by his country's government.”
The Israeli embassy issued a statement denying any participation by the Israeli government in the illegal trade of human organs but said it did recognize that its citizens, in emergency cases, could undergo organ transplants in other countries, "in a legal manner, complying with international norms," and with the financial support of their medical insurance.
However, IPS reports that the commission chair termed the Israeli stance “at the very least ‘anti-ethical’, adding that trafficking can only take place on a major scale if there is a major source of financing, such as the Israeli health system.” He went on to state that the resources provided by the Israeli health system "were a determining factor" that allowed the network to function. (12)
Tel Aviv hospital head promotes organ trafficking
IPS goes on to report:
“Nancy Scheper-Hughes, who heads the Organs Watch project at the U.S. University of California, Berkeley, testified to the Pernambuco legislative commission that international trafficking of human organs began some 12 years ago, promoted by Zacki Shapira, former director of a hospital in Tel Aviv.
“Shapira performed more than 300 kidney transplants, sometimes accompanying his patients to other countries, such as Turkey. The recipients are very wealthy or have very good health insurance, and the ‘donors’ are very poor people from Eastern Europe, Philippines and other developing countries, said Scheper-Hughes, who specialises in medical anthropology.”
Israel prosecutes organ traffickers
In 2007 Israel’s Ha’aretz newspaper reported that two men confessed to persuading “Arabs from the Galilee and central Israel who were developmentally challenged or mentally ill to agree to have a kidney removed for payment.” They then would refuse to pay them.
The paper reported that the two were part of a criminal ring that included an Israeli surgeon. According to the indictment, the surgeon sold the kidneys he harvested for between $125,000 and $135,000. (13)
Earlier that year another Israeli newspaper, the Jerusalem Post, reported that ten members of an Israeli organ smuggling ring targeting Ukrainians had been arrested. (14)
In still another 2007 story, the Jerusalem Post reported that “Professor Zaki Shapira, one of Israel's leading transplant surgeons, was arrested in Turkey on Thursday on suspicion of involvement in an organ trafficking ring. According to the report, the transplants were arranged in Turkey and took place at private hospitals in Istanbul.”
Israeli organ trafficking comes to the U.S.?
In July of this year even US media reported on the arrest of Levy Izhak Rosenbaum, from Brooklyn, recently arrested by federal officials in a massive corruption sweep in New Jersey that netted mayors, government officials and a number of prominent rabbis. Bostrom opens his article with this incident.
According to the federal complaint, Rosenbaum, who has close ties to Israel, said that he had been involved in the illegal sale of kidneys for 10 years. A US Attorney explained: "His business was to entice vulnerable people to give up a kidney for $10,000 which he would turn around and sell for $160,000." (15)
This is reportedly the first case of international organ trafficking in the U.S.
University of California anthropologist and organ trade expert Nancy Scheper-Hughes, who informed the FBI about Rosenbaum seven years ago, says she heard reports that he had held donors at gunpoint to ensure they followed through on agreements to “donate” their organs. (16)
Israel’s organ donor problems
Israel has an extraordinarily small number of willing organ donors. According to the Israeli news service Ynet, “the percentage of organs donated among Jews is the lowest of all the ethnic groups… In western countries, some 30 per cent of the population have organ donor cards. In Israel, in contrast, four percent of the population holds such cards. (17)
“According to statistics from the Health Ministry’s website, in 2001, 88 Israelis died waiting for a transplant because of a lack of donor organs. In the same year, 180 Israelis were brain dead, and their organs could have been used for transplant, but only 80 of their relatives agreed to donate their organs.”
According to Ynet, the low incidence of donors is related to “religious reasons.” In 2006 there was an uproar when an Israeli hospital known for its compliance with Jewish law performed a transplant operation using an Israeli donor. The week before, “a similar incident occurred, but since the patient was not Jewish it passed silently.” (18, 19)
The Swedish article reports that ‘Israel has repeatedly been under fire for its unethical ways of dealing with organs and transplants. France was among the countries that ceased organ collaboration with Israel in the 1990s. Jerusalem Post wrote that “the rest of the European countries are expected to follow France’s example shortly.”
“Half of the kidneys transplanted to Israelis since the beginning of the 2000s have been bought illegally from Turkey, Eastern Europe or Latin America. Israeli health authorities have full knowledge of this business but do nothing to stop it. At a conference in 2003 it was shown that Israel is the only western country with a medical profession that doesn’t condemn the illegal organ trade. The country takes no legal measures against doctors participating in the illegal business – on the contrary, chief medical officers of Israel’s big hospitals are involved in most of the illegal transplants, according to Dagens Nyheter (December 5, 2003).”
To fill this need former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, then health minister of Israel, organized a big donor campaign in the summer of 1992, but while the number of donors skyrocketed, need still greatly surpassed supply.
Palestinian disappearances increase
Bostrom, who earlier wrote of all this in his 2001 book Inshallah, (20) reports in his recent article:
“While the campaign was running, young Palestinian men started to disappear from villages in the West Bank and Gaza. After five days Israeli soldiers would bring them back dead, with their bodies ripped open.
“Talk of the bodies terrified the population of the occupied territories. There were rumors of a dramatic increase of young men disappearing, with ensuing nightly funerals of autopsied bodies.”
“I was in the area at the time, working on a book. On several occasions I was approached by UN staff concerned about the developments. The persons contacting me said that organ theft definitely occurred but that they were prevented from doing anything about it. On an assignment from a broadcasting network I then travelled around interviewing a great number of Palestinian families in the West Bank and Gaza – meeting parents who told of how their sons had been deprived of organs before being killed.”
He describes the case of 19-year-old Bilal Achmed Ghanan, shot by Israeli forces invading his village.
“The first shot hit him in the chest. According to villagers who witnessed the incident he was subsequently shot with one bullet in each leg. Two soldiers then ran down from the carpentry workshop and shot Bilal once in the stomach. Finally, they grabbed him by his feet and dragged him up the twenty stone steps of the workshop stair… Israeli soldiers loading the badly wounded Bilal in a jeep and driving him to the outskirts of the village, where a military helicopter waited. The boy was flown to a destination unknown to his family.”
Five days later he was returned, “dead and wrapped up in green hospital fabric.” Bostrom reports that as the body was lowered into the grave, his chest was exposed and onlookers could see that he was stitched up from his stomach to his head. Bostrom writes that this was not the first time people had seen such a thing.
“The families in the West Bank and in Gaza felt that they knew exactly what had happened: “Our sons are used as involuntary organ donors,” relatives of Khaled from Nablus told me, as did the mother of Raed from Jenin and the uncles of Machmod and Nafes from Gaza, who had all disappeared for a number of days only to return at night, dead and autopsied.”
Why autopsies?
Bostrom describes the questions that families asked:
“Why are they keeping the bodies for up to five days before they let us bury them? What happened to the bodies during that time? Why are they performing autopsy, against our will, when the cause of death is obvious? Why are the bodies returned at night? Why is it done with a military escort? Why is the area closed off during the funeral? Why is the electricity interrupted?”
Israel’s answer was that all Palestinians who were killed were routinely autopsied. However, Bostrom points out that of the133 Palestinians who were killed that year, only 69 were autopsied.
He goes on to write:
“We know that Israel has a great need for organs, that there is a vast and illegal trade of organs which has been running for many years now, that the authorities are aware of it and that doctors in managing positions at the big hospitals participate, as well as civil servants at various levels. We also know that young Palestinian men disappeared, that they were brought back after five days, at night, under tremendous secrecy, stitched back together after having been cut from abdomen to chin.
It’s time to bring clarity to this macabre business, to shed light on what is going on and what has taken place in the territories occupied by Israel since the Intifada began.” (21)
The new “Blood Libel”?
In scanning through the reaction to Bostrom’s report, one is struck by the multitude of charges that his article is a new version of the old anti-Semitic “blood libel.” Given that fact, it is interesting to examine a 2007 book by Israel’s preeminent expert on medieval Jewish history, and what happened to him.
The author is Bar-Ilan professor (and rabbi) Ariel Toaff, son of the former chief rabbi of Rome, a religious leader so famous that an Israeli journalist writes that Toaff’s father “is to Italian Jewry as the Eiffel Tower is to Paris.” Ariel Toaff, himself, is considered “one of the greatest scholars in his field.” (22, 23)
In February 2007 the Israeli and Italian media were abuzz (though most of the U.S. media somehow missed it) with news that Professor Toaff had written a book entitled "Pasque di Sangue" (“Blood Passovers”) (24) containing evidence that there “was a factual basis for some of the medieval blood libels against the Jews.”
Based on 35 years of research, Toaff had concluded that there were at least a few, possibly many, real incidents.
In an interview with an Italian newspaper (the book was published in Italy), Toaff says:
“My research shows that in the Middle Ages, a group of fundamentalist Jews did not respect the biblical prohibition and used blood for healing. It is just one group of Jews, who belonged to the communities that suffered the severest persecution during the Crusades. From this trauma came a passion for revenge that in some cases led to responses, among them ritual murder of Christian children.” (25)
(Incidentally, an earlier book containing similar findings was published some years ago, also by an Israeli professor, Israel Shahak, of whom Noam Chomsky once wrote, “Shahak is an outstanding scholar, with remarkable insight and depth of knowledge. His work is informed and penetrating, a contribution of great value.” ) (26)
Professor Toaff was immediately attacked from all sides, including pressure orchestrated by Anti-Defamation League chairman Abe Foxman, but Toaff stood by his 35 years of research, announcing:
"I will not give up my devotion to the truth and academic freedom even if the world crucifies me… One shouldn't be afraid to tell the truth."
Before long, however, under relentless public and private pressure, Toaff had recanted, withdrawn his book, and promised to give all profits that had already accrued (the book had been flying off Italian bookshelves) to Foxman’s Anti-Defamation League. A year later he published a “revised version.”
Donald Bostrom’s experience seems to be a repeat of what Professor Toaff endured: calumny, vituperation, and defamation. Bostrom has received death threats as well, perhaps an experience that Professor Toaff also shared.
If Israel is innocent of organ plundering accusations, or if its culpability is considerably less than Bostrom and others suggest, it should welcome honest investigations that would clear it of wrongdoing. Instead, the government and its advocates are working to suppress all debate and crush those whose questions and conclusions they find threatening.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, rather than responding to calls for an investigation, is demanding that the Swedish government abandon its commitment to a free press and condemn the article. The Israeli press office, apparently in retaliation and to prevent additional investigation, is refusing to give press credentials to reporters from the offending newspaper.
Just as in the case of the rampage against Jenin, the attack on the USS liberty, the massacre of Gaza, the crushing of Rachel Corrie, the torture of American citizens, and a multitude of other examples, Israel is using its considerable, worldwide resources to interfere with the investigative process.
It is difficult to conclude that it has nothing to hide.
Alison Weir is executive director of If Americans Knew. A version of this article containing citations and additional information is available at http://ifamericansknew/cur_sit/sweden.html
Notes.
1/ There are two English translations; this article uses the first:
http://www.tlaxcala.es/pp.asp?reference=8390&lg=en
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/SwedishTrans.html
The original Swedish article in Aftonbladet can be viewed at
http://www.aftonbladet.se/kultur/article5652583.ab
2/ New York Times, Feb. 3, 1969, p. 8, Column 6 (53 words)
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1046041.html
3/ 40 years after Israel's first transplant, donor's family says his heart was stolen
By Dana Weiler-Polak, Haaretz Correspondent, Dec. 14, 2008
http://www.wrmea.com/backissues/0490/9004021.htm
4/ Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, April 1990, Page 21, The Intifada: Autopsies and Executions
http://www.jweekly.com/
5/ October 30, 1998,Bizarre death of Scottish tourist involves suicide, missing heart
by NETTY C. GROSS, Jerusalem Post Service
http://www.forward.com/articles/112915/
6/ The Forward, Illicit Body-Part Sales Present Widespread Problem, By Rebecca Dube, Aug. 26, 2009
http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/msg114437.html
7/ Masons, Muslims, Templars, Jews, Henry and Dolly.
http://ccun.org/Opinion
8/ Al-Jazeerah: Cross-Cultural Understanding, Khalid Amayreh, August 20, 2009
9/ http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/Flash.aspx/12699
10/
http://www.forward.com/articles/112915/
11/ http://www.economist.com/
12/
The Economist, Organ transplants: The gap between supply and demand, Oct. 9, 2008
12/http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=22524
BRAZIL: Poor Sell Organs to Trans-Atlantic Trafficking Ring
By Mario Osava, IPS, Feb. 23, 2004
13/ http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/935092.html
Haaretz, Two Haifa men sentenced to jail for organ trafficking, By Fadi Eyadat, Dec. 18, 2007
14/
http://www.jpost.com/Police uncover illegal organ trade ring
By REBECCA ANNA STOIL, July 23, 2007
15/ http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/671687
Sting rocks U.S. transplant industry, David Porter, Carla K. Johnson, ASSOCIATED PRESS, july 25, 2009
16/
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1102799.html
U.S. Professor: I told FBI about kidney trafficking 7 years ago
By Natasha Mozgovaya, Haaretz Correspondent, August, 3, 2009
17/
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3388529,00.html
A mitzvah called organ donation, Efrat Shapira-Rosenberg, 10.6.07
18/ http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3265889,00.html
Orthodox in uproar over organ donation incident, Neta Sela, 06.22.06
19/
http://www.israelshamir.net/English/Body_Snatchers.htm
The Return of the Body Snatchers, By Israel Shamir,
20/
http://www.bokus.com/b/9789170370939.html
21/ http://www.tlaxcala.es/pp.asp?reference=8390&lg=en
22/ http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/829381.html
Ha’aretz. The Wayward Son, by Adi Schwartz, March 1, 2007
23/ http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/824152.html
Ha’aaretz, Bar-Ilan to order professor to explain research behind blood libel book
By Ofri Ilani, Haaretz Service and The Associated Press, Feb 11, 2007
24/
http://www.bloodpassover.com/toafftableofcontents.htm
Israeli writer Israel Shamir reports that some years ago “…a leading Chabad rabbi, Yitzhak Ginzburgh, gave his religious permission for a Jew to take a liver from a non-Jew even without his consent. He said that ‘a Jew is entitled to extract the liver from a goy if he needs it, for the life of a Jew is more valuable than the life of a goy, likewise the life of a goy is more valuable than the life of an animal.’
25/ http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/824152.html
Haaretz, Bar Ilan to order professor to explain research behind blood libel book, by Ofri Hani, Feb. 11, 2007.
26. http://www.wrmea.com/archives/august-september01/0108011.html
Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, August/September 2001, page 11, In Memoriam: Israel Shahak (1933-2001), By Norton Mezvinsky
August 18, 2009
Whose Acre?
By URI AVNERY
The ancient port of Acre is now the object of a fierce battle. The Arab inhabitants of the town want the port to bear the name of an Arab hero, Issa al Awam, a general under Saladin, the Muslim leader who defeated the Crusaders. The municipality of Acre, which of course is dominated by the Jewish inhabitants, has decided to give the port the name of an Israeli functionary.
The Arab citizens set up a monument for their hero. The municipality declared it to be an “illegal structure” and decided to destroy it. This could have been a small local conflict, one of many in this mixed and quarrelsome town, if it did not have such profound ideological and political implications.
I love old Acre. For me, it is the most beautiful and interesting town in the country, after East Jerusalem. It is one of the most ancient towns in the country, perhaps in the whole world. It is mentioned in the Bible In the first chapter of Judges (which, by the way, completely contradicts the genocidal Book of Joshua.) The chapter enumerates the Canaanite towns which were not conquered by the Children of Israel. It remained a Phoenician town, one of the port towns from which intrepid Hebrew-speaking sailors went forth and colonized the shores of the Mediterranean Sea, from Tyre to Carthage.
The fortunes of Acre reached their zenith during the times of the Crusaders. It was then the only port in the country that could be used during all the seasons of the year. The Crusaders succeeded in taking it after a stubborn defense. A hundred years later, when the great Salah-ad-Din (Saladin) put an end to the Crusaders’ rule in Jerusalem, he drove them out of Acre, too. The Knights of the Cross recaptured it, and for another hundred years it served as the capital of the reduced Crusader state. In 1291, when the remnants of the Crusader kingdom were wiped out, Acre was the last Crusader town to fall to the Muslims. The image of the last Crusaders and their women jumping from the quays of Acre has been engraved in the memory of the age and has given birth to the expression still current: “to throw into the sea”.
Later, too, the town had a checkered history. A Bedouin chieftain, Daher al-Omar, took it over and created a kind of independent semi-state of Galilee. Even Napoleon, one of the Great Captains of history, came from Egypt in 1799 and laid siege to it, but was roundly defeated by the Arabs, with the help of British sailors. When the British became the lords of the land in 1917, they turned the imposing Crusader fortress of Acre into a prison, in which the leaders of the Hebrew underground organizations, among others, were incarcerated. In one of its most daring exploits, the Irgun broke into the fortress and freed its prisoners. In 1947, the Israeli army conquered the town, which was until then entirely Arab. The ancient part of the town, with its beautiful minarets and Crusader fortifications, continued to be Arab. So did the port, which now serves fishermen.
But around this quarter, Jewish neighborhoods have sprung up, faceless like many hundreds of such neighborhoods throughout Israel, and their inhabitants now constitute the majority. They do not like their Arab neighbors very much. From time to time, quarrels break out between the two populations. The Arab inhabitants believe that Acre has been their town since ancient times and consider the Jews intruders. The Jews are convinced that the town belongs to them and that the Arabs are, at best, a tolerated minority that should shut up. The current dispute can well turn violent.
In every conflict between Jews and Arabs in this country, the rather childish question arises: Who was here first? The Arabs conquered the country, which they then called Jund Filistin (military district Palestine) in 635 AD, and since then it has been under Muslim rule (apart from the Crusader period) until the arrival of the British. They claim “We were first”. The Zionist version is different. In Biblical times, most of the country belonged to the kingdoms of Judea and Israel, even though the coast belonged to the Phoenicians in the North and the Philistines in the South. (In spite of all the frantic efforts of a hundred years, no archaeological evidence has been found that there ever was an exodus from Egypt, a conquest of Canaan by the Children of Israel or a kingdom of David and Solomon.) Since the kingdom of Ahab, around 870 BC, Israel has been on the well-attested historical map. After the Babylonian exile, the Jews dominated parts of the country, with constantly changing borders, until Roman times. Ergo: “We were first”.
If the Israelites were here before the Muslims, who was here before the Israelites? The Canaanites, of course. “They were first”. But who represents them? I once wrote a satirical piece about the “First Canaanite Congress” which takes place somewhere in the world. The participants declare that they are the descendents of the original inhabitants of the country and claim it for themselves. That is not entirely a joke. In the first years of the last century Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, who was to become the second president of Israel, tried to harness the Canaanites to Zionism. He researched and found that the population of this country has not really changed from the earliest times. The Canaanites mixed with the Israelites, became Jews and Hellenists, and when the Byzantine empire, which then ruled this country, adopted Christianity, they too became Christians. After the Muslim conquest, they gradually became Arabs. In other words, the same village was Canaanite, became Israelite, passed through all the stages and in the end, became Arab. Nowadays it is Palestinian, unless it was wiped out in 1948 and replaced by an Israeli settlement. Throughout, the population did not really change. Many of the place names did not change either. Every new conqueror brought with him a new set of beliefs and a new elite, but the population itself did not change much. No conqueror was interested in driving out the inhabitants, who provided him with food and revenue.
In the opinion of Ben-Zvi, the Palestinian Arabs are really the descendents of the ancient Israelites. But when the Israeli-Palestinian conflict gathered momentum, this theory was forgotten. Recently, some Palestinians adopted a rather similar theory. By the same historical logic, they claim that the Palestinian Arabs are the descendents of the ancient Canaanites, and therefore “they were first”, even before the Children of Israel of Biblical times. It was only the Zionist conquest that, for the first time in history, radically changed the composition of the population. The Canaanites and the ancient Israelites spoke different dialects of the same Semitic language, which is nowadays called Hebrew. Later on, Aramaic became the language of the country, and later on Arabic.
Last week, new research was published, showing that the vernacular Syrian-Palestinian Arabic dialect includes many words that have their origin in ancient Hebrew and Aramaic, and which do not appear in the dialect of other Arab countries. Clearly, they were absorbed by the native Arab dialect many centuries ago. They are mainly day-to-day agricultural words, and it is logical to assume that they entered the Arabic language from the Aramaic that it replaced.
Why is that important? How does it affect the Acre dispute? Many years ago I read a book by the late American-Arab scholar, Philip Hitti, a Maronite Christian from Lebanon, entitled History of Syria. According to the Arab historical view, Syria (a-Sham in classical Arabic) includes today’s Syria as well as well as present-day Lebanon. Jordan, Israel, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. The book made a lasting impression on me. It recounts the history of this country from prehistoric times to the present, with all its stages, as one continuous story, which includes Canaanites and Israelites, Phoenicians and Philistines, Aramaeans and Arabs, Crusaders and Mamluks, Turks and Britons, Muslims, Christians and Jews. They all belong to the history of the country, all of them contributed to its culture, language and architecture, palaces and fortresses, synagogues and churches, mosques and cemeteries. Anyone thinking about peace and reconciliation should absorb this picture.
What kind of history is taught now in the schools of the two peoples? Both have a mobile history which is wandering about the landscape. Jewish history starts with “Abraham Our Father” in present-day Iraq and the exodus from Egypt, the receiving of the Ten Commandments at Mount Sinai in present-day Egypt, the Conquest of Canaan, King David and the other legends of the Bible, which are taught as actual history. It continues in the country until the destruction of the Temple by Titus and the Bar Kokhba rebellion against the Romans, when it goes into “exile”, concentrating on the chain of expulsions and persecutions, only returning to the country with the early Zionist settlers. This history ignores not only all that happened in the country before the Israelite era, but also everything that happened during the 1747 years between the Bar Kokhba uprising in 135 AD and the start of the pre-Zionist settlement in 1882. An alumnus of the Israeli education system knows next to nothing about the country during these eras.
On the Arab side, things are no better. The Palestinian-Arab historical picture starts in the Arab peninsula with the advent of the Prophet Mohammad, mentioning the era of Jahiliyah (“ignorance”) before that, and comes to Palestine with the Muslim conquerors. What happened here before 635 AD does not interest it. The pupils of these two education systems – the Jewish-Israeli and the Palestinian-Arab – grow up with two entirely different historical narratives.
I dream of the day when in every school in this country, in Israel and in Palestine, Jews and Arabs will learn not only these two histories, but also the complete history of the country which includes all the periods and cultures. They will learn, for example, that when the crusaders invaded the country, Muslims and Jews stood together against the cruel invader and were massacred together. They will learn that in Haifa, the local Jews led the defense and were admired for their heroism, until they were slaughtered side by side with the Muslims. Such identification with the history of the country can serve as a solid basis for a reconciliation between the peoples.
A dozen years ago, inspired by the unforgettable Feisal al-Husseini, I drew up a Manifesto on Jerusalem for Gush Shalom. One of its paragraphs reads: “Our Jerusalem is a mosaic of all the cultures, all the religions and all the periods that enriched the city, from earliest antiquity to this very day – Canaanites and Jebusites and Israelites, Jews and Hellenes, Romans and Byzantines, Christians and Muslims, Arabs and Mamluks, Ottomans and Britons, Palestinians and Israelis. They and all the others who made their contribution to the city have a place in the spiritual and physical landscape of Jerusalem.” In this list, the Crusaders are missing, and not by mistake. They were in our original text. But when I asked the renowned Arab-Israeli writer Emil Habibi to be the first to sign, he exclaimed: “I shall not sign any document that mentions these abominable murderers!” Almost everything that can be said about Jerusalem is true for Acre, too. Its history is also continuous from prehistoric times until today, and the Arab general Issa al Awam belongs to it as much as the English Crusader Richard the Lionheart and the Etzel fighters who broke the prison walls.
======================================
Israeli Nuclear Weapons and Western Hypocrisy
Readers Number : 786
25/08/2009 By Yusuf Fernandez
August 24, 2009
Al-Manar.com.lb is not responsible for the content of this article or for any external internet sites. The views expressed are the author's alone.
Once again, Arab states have announced that this year they will submit a resolution at September’s general assembly of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in order to force Israel to sign the Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and open up its secretive military nuclear programme to international inspections.
Amr Moussa, secretary general of the 22-nation League of Arab States, has sent a letter to Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt to ask him to support the resolution entitled “Israel's Nuclear Capabilities.” Currently, Sweden holds the European Union’s rotating presidency. Other letters have been sent to the other 26 EU member countries. The Arab resolution is expected to be put up for a vote at the IAEA general assembly.
The Arab nations consider Israel’s rejection to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) as the main obstacle to global nuclear disarmament. “What compounds the problem is that the nuclear non-proliferation regime has lost its legitimacy in the eyes of Arab public opinion because of the perceived double-standards concerning Israel, the only state in the region outside the NPT and known to possess nuclear weapons,” former IAEA director Mohamed Al Baradei wrote. Arab diplomats point to a chronic imbalance of power in the Middle East caused by Israeli nuclear weapons and say that this situation breeds instability.
“It is essential that Israel comply with international resolutions,” Mohammed Sobeih, the assistant secretary general in charge of Palestinian affairs, told reporters in Cairo. “Everyone knows that Israel possesses weapons of mass destruction which could reach as far as 2,000 kilometers (1,240 miles) and all Arab capitals are within this range," Sobeih added. Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Muqrin bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, agreed. “The existing Israeli nuclear capability is the most dangerous strategic threat to Gulf security in the short and medium term,” he said at a conference organized by the London-based International Institute of Strategic Studies.
Israel is one of the few states in the world that have refused to sign the NPT and is reportedly the only state in the Middle East having nuclear weapons. Israel has maintained a policy known as a “nuclear ambiguity” and neither confirms nor denies the possession of these weapons. The main rationale for this policy is to deny Israel’s Muslim neighbors the argument for developing their own nuclear deterrent.
That policy was, however, shaken in December 2006 when then-Prime Minister Ehud Olmert acknowledged Israel's possession of nuclear weapons in an interview with a German TV channel. Previously, during 1991 Gulf War, Israel threatened a nuclear attack on Iraq if this country put chemical or biological warheads on their Scud missiles fired at Israel.
The Israeli military nuclear programme was initiated with French assistance in the 1950s. In 1958 Israel started to build the nuclear reactor in the southern town of Dimona, which became the centerpiece of the programme. Dimona started producing nuclear bombs in 1968. Currently, the Dimona site has a plutonium/tritium production reactor, an underground chemical separation plant and nuclear component fabrication facilities. All of the production and fabrication of special nuclear materials (plutonium, lithium-6, tritium, and enriched and unenriched uranium) takes place at Dimona although the design and assembly of nuclear weapons occurs elsewhere, including an assembly facility operated by Rafael north of Haifa.
The Israeli scientist Mordechai Vanunu has revealed many details of the Israeli nuclear programme. He said in an interview with American investigator Joe Parko: “I worked from 1976 to 1985 at the Israeli secret underground nuclear weapons production facility at the Dimona nuclear plant in the Negev desert. During my time there, I was involved in processing plutonium for 10 nuclear bombs per year,” Vanunu said. “I realized my country had already processed enough plutonium for 200 nuclear weapons. I became really afraid when we started processing Lithium 6 which is only used for the hydrogen bomb. I felt I had to prevent a nuclear holocaust in the Middle East so I took 60 pictures of the underground nuclear weapons processing plant some 75 meters under the Dimona plant.”
“I resigned my post and left Israel in 1986. I first went to Australia and then made a connection with The Times in London. After a group of nuclear scientists verified my photos as proving Israeli nuclear weapons production, my story was published in England,” Vanunu said. “A few months later, I was kidnapped by Israeli agents in Rome and sent secretly by ship to Israel where I was subjected to a closed military trial without counsel. I was sentenced to 18 years in prison. I spent 12 years in solitary confinement,” Vanunu said.
A report complied by a Washington-based military think tank, the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), claims Israeli nuclear warheads have both air and sea capabilities. The study, authored by former US Defence Department strategist Anthony Cordesman, disclosed that Israel is currently “in possession of 200 nuclear warheads” and has produced nuclear weapons with “a yield of one megaton”. The Zionist state also has low yield neutron bombs able to destroy troops with minimal damage to property.
The report adds that Israel uses US-made F-16 or missiles Jericho-1 and 2 to deliver the warheads. The government of Israel has also recently bought three German Dolphin Class 800 submarines to have a strike capability with nuclear cruise missiles launched from the sea.
The existence of a nuclear-armed Israel shows the hypocrisy of Western powers that continue to show their “deepening concern” about the “potential pursuit of a nuclear weapon by Iran”. At a White House press conference on 18 May 2009, US President Barack Obama expressed “deepening concern” about "the potential pursuit of a nuclear weapon by Iran.” He continued: “Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon would not only be a threat to Israel and a threat to the United States, but would be profoundly destabilizing in the international community as a whole and could set off a nuclear arms race in the Middle East.”
In his speech, Obama “forgot” to mention the Israeli nuclear arsenal, which is considered by Middle East Muslim nations as a threat. US officials never speak about the Israeli threat to Muslim nations because, according to their view, Arab and Muslim nations do no have the right to live in security. Only Israel and the US do. Actually, the US policy in the Middle East seeks to preserve Israel´s nuclear monopoly and its ability to threaten and blackmail Arab and Muslim nations. Israel thinks that if it attacks any Muslim country of the Middle East, the latter will hold back from retaliating due to fears of Israel's nuclear weapons. This nuclear power feeds Israel’s superiority sentiment and sustains its peace “rejectionism” to paraphrase US political activist and author Noam Chomsky, by giving it a false sense of invincibility.
Unlike Israel, Iran has signed the NPT and their installations are opened to IAEA inspectors. Despite many years of inspections, the agency has found no evidence that Iran has, or ever had, a nuclear weapons programme, although Western media is giving the opposite impression.
Iran has repeatedly assured that its nuclear programme is peaceful and is aimed at providing the energy-hungry country with the power it needs to develop its industry and save a large amount of oil that is being consumed at home and could be exported instead. Furthermore, the Iranian Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, issued a fatwa on September 2004 saying that “the production, stockpiling, and use of nuclear weapons are forbidden under Islam and that the Islamic Republic of Iran shall never acquire these weapons”. The Iranian foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, has also promoted the “historic idea” of a Middle East free from weapons of mass destruction, which is supported by Arab countries in the region.
The Islamic Republic of Iran has never attacked or invaded its neighbors. The only war in which Iran has been involved since the Islamic Revolution, the Iraq-Iran war in the 1980s, was initiated by Saddam Hussein’s regime. When Iranian forces were attacked with chemical weapons by Saddam’s troops during that war, Iran did not retaliate against the Iraqis due to religious and political considerations.
In contrast, Israel is currently occupying territories of three Arab states, Palestine, Lebanon and Syria, and has launched bloody wars against its neighbors, including against Lebanon in 2006 and Gaza in 2008-2009. In these wars, Israel illegally employed weapons, such as white phosphorus, against civilians and committed numerous war crimes and crimes against humanity, some of which have been reported by UN commissions of inquiry. Others countries of the region, such as Iran or Egypt, have also been threatened by Israeli officials and politicians.
The Western demand for Iran to stop the uranium enrichment process is unacceptable for any sovereign nation. The uranium enrichment process is allowed by the Article IV (1) of the NPT, so long as it is for civil nuclear purposes. Actually, the US/EU, which continue ignoring Israel’s nuclear arsenal of more than 200 warheads, are demanding Iran to renounce a legal right, which does not contradict the peaceful nature of its programme. The IAEA has testified that only low enriched uranium suitable for a power generation reactor is being produced in the Iranian Natanz plant and that none of it has been diverted from the facility for other purposes. This Western demand is also profoundly discriminatory against Iran, since no objection has ever been raised to other countries -or even to Iran itself during the time of the Shah’s regime- which have enrichment plants on their respective territories in order to manufacture fuel for their reactors.
However, the international community is increasingly aware of this hypocrisy and double standards and is also demanding the end of Israel exceptionalism and its submission to the rules of the non-proliferation regime. The IAEA cannot maintain its current policies without falling into total discredit. The same can be said about the United States and EU states, which demand the disarmament of Iran from even the “knowledge to produce nuclear weapons” while turning a blind eye on Israel’s development of a nuclear arsenal.
Therefore, Obama’s above-mentioned claims about “the Iranian nuclear threat” are a blatant lie and clear example of dishonesty. If Obama wants really to improve the currently strained relations between his country and the Muslim world, he will have to take into account that he will fail in his goal if he keeps on pursuing aggressive and hypocritical policies towards Iran, which is not only one of the main centers of the Islamic world, but a very popular country among Muslim masses. If he believes that this objective can be achieved by shaking hands with some Arab and Muslim dictators without any legitimacy beyond their close circles of well-paid advisors and military and police chiefs, he is completely wrong.
//
Olmert Indictment Sounds Alarm on Israel Corruption
Readers Number : 22
31/08/2009 For the first time in the history of the Zionist entity, a person who served as prime minister will sit on the defendant's bench.
The State Prosecution filed charges Sunday against former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, attributing to him a litany of violations that include accepting bribes, fraud, breach of trust, falsifying documents and income tax evasion.
Olmert's attorneys said late Sunday following news of his indictment that the prosecution had no evidence of the gravest charges against him, particularly bribe-taking, money laundering or theft.
"The indictment proves to us just how right we were to refuse to attend a hearing with the attorney general and the state prosecution," wrote his attorneys in response to the indictment.
The corruption trial is expected to last up to four years, without taking into account possible appeals at the Supreme Court. A panel of justices at the Jerusalem District Court will likely deliberate over Olmert's case twice a week.
The indictment focuses on three investigations against Olmert for which he was questioned by police: the Talansky Affair, Rishon Tours, and the Investment Center. The charges also refer to false declarations made to the State Comptroller regarding funds he received from a U.S. citizen and an assessment of the value of his pen collection.
Olmert's former bureau chief, Shula Zaken, was also indicted with similar charges. She is also accused of wire tapping Olmert's conversations with politicians and ministers, without his knowledge.
Olmert's communications adviser, Amir Dan, said Sunday in response to the indictment that "after they removed a prime minister from government it was clear that the attorney general and the State Prosecution had no other option than to file an indictment against Olmert."
"The court of law, on the other hand, is free of such ulterior motives, and therefore Olmert is convinced that at the court he will be able, once and for all, to prove his innocence," he added. "It is important to remember that the Cremieux and Bank Leumi affairs [other police investigation against Olmert] also began with huge headlines and stood for years, until they ended with nothing. The end of these cases will be the same."
Meanwhile, Israeli daily Haaretz published a report under the title “Olmert indictment sounds alarm on Israel corruption” in which it said that the former Israeli Prime Minister’s indictment is not only a technical legal document. It is also an ethical document that sounds an alarm over serious government corruption.
“In Olmert's case, this corruption allegedly included intentional concealment of financial benefits; abuse of his public office; damaging the image of the civil service; and false documentation and fraudulent concealment of income by someone who, among his other positions, was the minister responsible for guarding the public purse and expanding state revenue,” Haaretz added.
Haaretz report continued, “The Supreme Court has stressed the need to punish governmental corruption, a crime it said "has become a plague on society, one that is exacting a high price and necessitates deterrent sentences." However, the road to convicting Olmert is still a long one. His trial will involve 280 prosecution witnesses testifying over what will almost certainly be a very long period.”
The Israeli daily concluded, “Moreover, while the allegations against him involve systematic and outrageous acts, proving them will not be easy. His experienced attorneys will work hard to raise reasonable doubts regarding the evidence that he raided the public coffers. Olmert is entitled to the presumption of innocence that every defendant enjoys. He is embarking on a battle to prove his innocence, and the public will have to await the outcome.”