Palestijnse boycot producten nederzettingen in strijd met Oslo Akkoorden

De Palestijnse boycot van producten uit de nederzettingen haalde zelfs het achtuur journaal eergisteren, met een reportage van Sander van Hoorn die zelf had gecheckt of er echt geen producten uit nederzettingen meer in Palestijnse supermarkten werden verkocht. Tot zover kan ik er alle begrip voor opbrengen, maar dat eigenaren van supermarkten die zich er niet aan houden in de gevangenis kunnen worden gegooid vind ik nogal belachelijk, net als de hoge straffen die er staan op werken in de nederzettingen.

 

Los van de vraag of het al dan niet begrijpelijk is dat de Palestijnse Autoriteit op deze manier campagne voert tegen de nederzettingen, Aaron Lerner wijst erop dat het waarschijnlijk in strijd is met de Oslo Akkoorden, om precies te zijn de Gaza-Jericho overeenkomst uit 1994. Deze stelt namelijk dat

 

#1. "The agricultural produce of both sides will have free and unrestricted access to each others' markets"

 

#2. "There will be free movement of industrial goods free of any restrictions"

 

En voordat iemand over de Gaza blokkade begint: een van de problemen met Hamas is juist dat ze de Oslo Akkoorden weigeren te erkennen.

 

RP

-------------

Background -  PA boycott of settlements violate the Gaza-Jericho Agreement
Dr. Aaron Lerner  - IMRA

8 March 2010

 

A review of  ANNEX IV Protocol on Economic Relations between the Government of the State of Israel and the P.L.O., representing the Palestinian people Paris, April 29, 1994 of the Gaza Jericho Agreement finds that the boycott of goods produced in the "settlements" and a ban on the supply of Palestinian workers to the settlements constitutes a gross violation of the agreement by the PA.

#1. "The agricultural produce of both sides will have free and unrestricted access to each others' markets"

#2. "There will be free movement of industrial goods free of any restrictions"

#3. As for labor, the agreement enables the PA to independently  limit the flow of Israeli workers into the area under the control of the PA but not the flow of Palestinian workers out while calling for the sides to "attempt to maintain the normality of movement of labor".   The PA could, however, require that all Palestinians working in the settlements be employed through a Palestinian employment service. Palestinian employment legislation that would formally prevent employment in the settlements would be clearly at odds with the commitment  "to maintain the normality of movement of labor" and thus could be blocked.

It should be noted from the wording of the agreement that is clearly applies also to Israeli controlled areas beyond the Green Line.  For example, another part of the agreement deals with the obligation to maintain tourist sites.  Interpreting the Israeli "side" to be limited to within the Green Line would mean that no one has responsibility for the tourism sites in Israeli controlled territory beyond the Green Line.


Excerpts of relevant parts of the Agreement follow:.

GAZA-JERICHO AGREEMENT
ANNEX IV
Protocol on Economic Relations between the Government of the State of Israel and the P.L.O., representing the Palestinian people
Paris, April 29, 1994
www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Peace+Process/Guide+to+the+Peace+Process/Gaza-Jericho+Agreement+Annex+IV+-+Economic+Protoco.htm

Article VII
LABOR
1. Both sides will attempt to maintain the normality of movement of labor between them, subject to each side's right to determine from time to time the extent and conditions of the labor movement into its area. If the normal movement is suspended temporarily by either side, it will give the other side immediate notification, and the other side may request that the matter be discussed in the Joint Economic Committee.
The placement and employment of workers from one side in the area of the other side will be through the employment service of the other side and in accordance with the other sides' legislation. The Palestinian side has the right to regulate the employment of Palestinian labor in Israel through the Palestinian employment service, and the Israeli Employment Service will cooperate and coordinate in this regard.

Article VIII
AGRICULTURE
10. The agricultural produce of both sides will have free and unrestricted access to each others' markets, with the temporary exception of sales from one side to the other side of the following items only: poultry, eggs, potatoes, cucumbers, tomatoes and melons. The temporary restrictions on these items will be gradually removed on an increasing scale until they are finally eliminated by 1998...

Article IX
INDUSTRY
1. There will be free movement of industrial goods free of any restrictions including customs and import taxes between the two sides, subject to each side's legislation.
...
3. Each side will do its best to avoid damage to the industry of the other side and will take into consideration the concerns of the other side in its industrial policy.
...

Done in Paris, this twenty ninth day of April, 1994
For the Government of Israel
Finance Minister Avraham Shohat
For the PLO
Abu Ala (Ahmed Korei)

Fatah dreigt opnieuw met gewapende strijd

Nu er na veel gedoe en eindeloos gedrentel eindelijk indirecte vredesbesprekingen worden gehouden, buitelen bobo's uit Fatah met dreigementen richting Israel over elkaar heen. Als Israel niet snel doet wat de Palestijnen zeggen, wordt de gewapende strijd hervat, aldus een hoge Fatah functionaris. Vorige week dreigde een andere hoge Fatah functionaris al om Israel uit de VN te zetten, om het internationaal te isoleren, om nieuwe 'struggling tools' te ontwikkelen en de 'popular resistance' te hervatten. De Palestijnen nemen de vredesbesprekingen blijkbaar erg serieus, en doen er daarom alles aan ze te laten mislukken. Israelische concessies zoals verdere versoepeling van reisrestricties kunnen natuurlijk niet worden beantwoord met tegenconcessies, zodat langzaam aan een klimaat kan ontstaan waarin grotere en moeilijkere concessies kunnen worden gedaan, resulterend in de stichting van een Palestijnse staat. Voor dat laatste hebben de Palestijnen Israel overigens niet meer nodig, dat regelen ze wel met de VN en het Kwartet.

 

RP

------------

The Jerusalem Post
Fatah may resume 'armed struggle'
By KHALED ABU TOAMEH AND HERB KEINON
23/05/2010 04:30
http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=176147


Fatah official warns of outcome if proximity talks fail.

Fatah does not rule out the possibility of resuming an "armed struggle" against Israel if the US-sponsored proximity talks fail, a senior Fatah official said on Saturday.

Abbas Zaki, a member of the Fatah Central Committee and former Palestinian envoy to Lebanon, said that the Palestinians may also demand the implementation of United Nations Resolution 181, which was adopted in 1947 and recommends the division of the British Mandate of Palestine into two states, one Jewish and one Arab, with the Jerusalem-Bethlehem area being under special international protection.

Zaki's threat was made during an interview with the Jordanian newspaper Al-Ghad.

This was not the first threat of its kind by a top Fatah official in recent months, and it came fast on the heels of a threat last week by Fatah Central Committee member Nabil Shaath, who said that "there is a need to create and endorse new struggling tools, such as the popular resistance, and to increase our efforts in the international arena to isolate and punish Israel, prevent it from deepening its relations with the European Union and attempt to expel it from the United Nations."

Zaki, who is also an elected member of the Palestinian Legislative Council, told the Jordanian paper: "If Israel insists on closing the doors to peace, as it is currently doing, peace and stability won't be achieved in the region. We will then go to the United Nations and demand that we start from the beginning of the conflict, meaning going back to Resolution 181 and the armed struggle."

The Fatah official said that Israeli "intransigence" and "aggression" would force the Palestinians to return to the pre-Oslo Accords period, including the option of waging an armed struggle against Israel.

Zaki said that the PA should not repeat the mistake of the past, when it engaged in a "deaf dialogue" with Israel for 18 years after the signing of the Oslo Accords.

"We shouldn't give Israel more time," he stressed. "We must start thinking of all forms of struggle and taking measures to make Israel pay a price for its aggressive practices."

A senior Israeli official characterized Palestinian threats about a return to violence as a "serious problem."

"The whole peace process with the Palestinians was based on a commitment by Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian leadership that the Palestinian national movement was going to abrogate violence and pursue engagement through negotiations. If they return to violence, they are taking us back to the days before the Oslo process," he said.

The official termed this type of call a "huge problem and antithetical to the peace process."

Palestinian intransigence, evident in Yasser Arafat's rejection of then-prime minister Ehud Barak's offer at Camp David in 2000 – followed by PA President Mahmoud Abbas' rejection of Ehud Olmert's offer in 2008 – is the reason the peace process has not succeeded, the official countered.

"They can't, on the one hand, be intransigent, and on the other hand, say the peace process doesn't work," the official said.

'Palestinians are a testing field for modern weapons and Israeli adventures.'
The present Israeli government, Zaki charged, is not authorized to make any concessions to achieve peace. He said that an agreement could nevertheless be achieved if the US managed to convince the "Jewish lobby," AIPAC and Israeli leaders to stop tampering with the lives of the Palestinians and the resources of the Middle East.

The Palestinians would not make any concessions on the issues of Jerusalem and the "right of return" for Palestinian refugees, he said.

"Israel is hoping that these two issues would not be included in the talks, and this is a serious matter," he said. "The conflict began for the sake of the refugees and escalated for Jerusalem. We don't see a Palestine without Jerusalem and we believe that the pain and struggle won't end without the right of return for those who lost their homes and lands."

Reiterating the PA's opposition to the idea of a Palestinian state with temporary borders, Zaki said that the Palestinians have already "paid everything for the sake of peace and it's time to put an end to the bloody and violent conflict."

He also did not rule out the possibility that Israel would wage another massive military operation against the Gaza Strip.

"This is our fate," he added. "The Palestinians have become a testing field for modern weapons and Israeli adventures."

The Guardian, Israel. Zuid-Afrika en de atoombom

 

In The Guardian verscheen gisteren een artikel van Chris Mc Greal, bekend om zijn extreem antizionistische ideeën, over een geheime deal tussen Israel en Zuid-Afrika in 1975. Het artikel stelt dat een specifiek document, getekend door Peres en Botha, ''onthult dat Israel aanbood om kernkoppen aan het apartheidsregime te verkopen'. Dat is onjuist, zoals ook de auteur van het boek waarop het artikel is gebaseerd, op Al Jazeera toegeeft. Zuid-Afrika dacht dat Israel de kernkoppen aanbood, maar Israel heeft dat nooit bevestigd. Dat laat onverlet dat Israel en Zuid-Afrika wel samenwerkten op defensiegebied, en dat is natuurlijk niet bepaald fraai te noemen. Enkele redenen hiervoor zijn het feit dat Israel bijna geen bondgenoten had toendertijd en zich zeer geisoleerd voelde. De Afrikaanse landen, Frankrijk en ook Engeland hadden de relaties respectievelijk geheel stopgezet danwel bekoeld na de Zesdaagse Oorlog, en de relatie met de VS als grote bondgenoot bestond toen nog niet. Israel produceerde grotendeels haar eigen wapens en was hard op zoek naar een partner in dat project. In 1973 had Israel zich wederom existentieel bedreigd gevoeld. Ook werd Israel in de Verenigde Naties steeds feller aangevallen, en kreeg de PLO zonder enige consessie te doen een waarnemerstatus.

 

Overigens wisten maar weinig Israeli´s van deze samenwerking, en is dat niet openlijk in de Knesset en de media bediscussieerd. Veel Israeli's waren fel tegen het Zuid-Afrikaanse regime, dat in de oorlog aan de kant van de nazi's stond. En last but not least had het Apartheids regime zonder Arabische olie ook niet zo lang kunnen overleven.

 

RP

-----------

 

Psychedelic Mushroom Clouds at the Guardian

http://cifwatch.com:80/2010/05/25/psychedelic-mushroom-clouds-at-the-guardian/

May 25, 2010 | by Hawkeye

This is a guest post by AKUS

The Guardian has gone nuclear ("postal" may be more accurate) over the "revelation" that South Africa approached Israel in 1975 in an apparent effort to obtain nuclear technology. Unfortunately, its sources are tainted, as usual, in its rush to judgment once again.

The case the Guardian tries to build against Israel (in the hope of "demonstrating" that Israel is an apartheid state and a nuclear proliferator) is that Israel offered nuclear weapons technology to South Africa in 1975, during the period when the Apartheid regime was in power. It bases its claim primarily on a new book, "The Unspoken Alliance: Israel's Secret Relationship With Apartheid South Africa", by an American researcher – or a researcher at an American think-tank, at any rate – Sasha Polakow-Suransky.

However, there are massive flaws in the story the Guardian is trying to sell:

1. Listen to the following interview with Sasha Polakow-Suransky on Al-Jazeera. No matter how often the Al-Jazeera anchor tries to get him to say it, Sasha Polakow-Suransky will only say that South Africa may have approached Israel, but there is no document at all which actually states that Israel offered or agreed to provide nuclear weapons to South Africa in 1975. The closest he gets to claiming that Israel offered South Africa nuclear weapons is to say the documents show that "the South Africans perceived that there was a nuclear offer on the table" (at 1.02).

2. In a blog entry on the Guardian's website, A responsible nuclear power? , Julian Borger provides the following which similarly rebuts the Guardian's claims (my emphasis added):

Avner Cohen, the author of Israel and the Bomb, and the forthcoming The Worst-Kept Secret: Israel's Bargain with the Bomb, has taken issue with the headline of the piece.

While there is no doubt (as the documents point out) that there was a SA probe to Israel for nuclear weapons, which stimulates a certain opaque Israeli response made by the Israeli Minister of Defense, Shimon Peres, there is no proof whatsoever that Israel ultimately officially OFFERED those weapons to SA. In fact, I know that Israel did not: Israel neither offered and passed along nuclear weapons (and materials) nor weapons designs to the South Africans. Whatever the SA discussed among themselves in memos, and regardless of what Minister Peres told them, Prime Minister Rabin and the people in charge of the Israeli nuclear program (Mr. Shaleheveth Freier) were never willing to pass along weapons components and/or designs to the SA. Nothing like that ever formally offered to SA, regardless of Peres' reference to the "correct warhead." At the end of the day South Africa did not ask and Israel did not offer the "correct payloads.". Israel did behave as a responsible nuclear state.

3. Pik Botha, former Foreign Minister of South Africa and someone closely connected to the  South African Atomic Energy Board, responded to the Guardian claims that Israel offered nuclear weapons to South Africa with this:

"I doubt it very much. I doubt whether such an offer was ever made. I think I would have known about it."

4. One of the documents provided by the Guardian as "proof" includes the following:

Note that it clearly states "That the missiles will be armed with nuclear warheads manufactured in the RSA or acquired elsewhere" and there is no mention whatsoever of Israel. The document is headed "ISRAEL AND THE SOUTH AFRICAN BOMB" with no reference to the source other than that it is a "Declassified memo from General RF Armstrong" who was, according to Chris McGreal, "South Africa's military chief of staff".

5. As even the Guardian has had to admit in an amendment to the initial Chris McGreal article Shimon Peres has completely denied the story. His denial has belatedly been published by the Guardian – Israeli president denies offering nuclear weapons to apartheid South Africa – even though, typically, the Guardian sub-head editor cannot resist attempting to cast doubts on Peres' veracity rather than letting the readers judge for themselves – "Shimon Peres dismisses claims relating to secret files but US researcher says denials are disingenuous" despite the fact that both Sasha Polakow-Suransky and Avner Cohen back up Peres' assertion, as does the memo referenced above:

Israel's president, Shimon Peres, today robustly denied revelations in the Guardian and a new book that he offered to sell nuclear weapons to apartheid South Africa when he was defence minister in the 1970s.

His office said "there exists no basis in reality" for claims based on declassified secret South African documents that he offered nuclear warheads for sale with ballistic missiles to the apartheid regime in 1975. "Israel has never negotiated the exchange of nuclear weapons with South Africa. There exists no Israeli document or Israeli signature on a document that such negotiations took place," it said.

Neither Polakow-Suransky nor the Guardian has provided such a document, and can do nothing better than claiming that "if you connect the dots…" – you come to whatever conclusion you would like.

6. Another piece of "evidence" offered by Chris McGreal is the "account" by a traitor to the then regime spying for the USSR who first, apparently, made the hardly-reliable claim upon his release from prison after the end of apartheid that:

"there was an agreement between Israel and South Africa called Chalet which involved an offer by the Jewish state to arm eight Jericho missiles with "special warheads". Gerhardt said these were atomic bombs. But until now there has been no documentary evidence of the offer".

But, in fact, there is no such documentary evidence of the offer to this day, as Sasha Polakow-Suransky himself, the purveyor of the rumor or theory had to admit on Al Jazeera.

7. Not one of the documents offered by the Guardian actually mentions nuclear weapons in any context that an Israeli representative signed. The most pathetic of the examples of "proof" is in the collection of The memos and minutes that confirm Israel's nuclear stockpile assembled by Chris McGreal. In one such document, minutes from a meeting indicated that "Minister Peres said that the correct payload was available in three sizes" referring apparently to the Jericho missile codenamed "Chalet". From this McGreal inferred that the "three sizes" referred to conventional, chemical and nuclear rather than the more logical inference of three different weights (the Jericho I has been estimated to carry a payload of 450-650 kg and the Jericho II 750-1000 kg; the size of the payload influencing the distance the missile would travel).  In the video of Polakow-Suransky above, he even has to admit that Peres's reference to "three sizes" is "a bit ambiguous and there are various different interpretations" (at 1.46). In another document, a Letter from Shimon Peres, 11/11/1974, Peres's "confirmation" is nothing more than a polite diplomatic letter thanking a Dr. Rhoodie, apparently a South African PR flack, for his assistance in making Peres' trip to South Africa successful and offering to do the same for him when he next visited Israel.

8. The Guardian even roped in Gary Younge to write an article that rivals the worst in quality, innuendo, and false accusations that CiF is capable of presenting that tries to defend Richard Goldstone by claiming that "[a]s we learn elsewhere in the Guardian today, it even offered to sell the South African regime nuclear weapons".

In fact, even the Guardian has now has to skirt around that claim. Younge goes even further into the realms of hypocrisy by citing a completely false statement from Sasha Polakow-Suransky:

"Throughout the 70s and 80s Israel had a deep, intimate and lucrative relationship with South Africa," explains Sasha Polakow-Suransky, author of The Unspoken Alliance: Israel's Secret Relationship With Apartheid South Africa. "Israel's arms supplies helped to prolong the apartheid regime's rule and to survive international sanctions." No criticism of Goldstone's complicity from representatives of the Israeli state can be taken seriously that does not acknowledge and condemn Israel's even greater support of the self-same system.

Anyone with the slightest knowledge of South African armaments knows that most of its weapons came from Britain, France and Belgium and were in service at the time of these discussions – for example, the South African Airforce at the time used English Electric Canberra bombers (Period of Service: 1963 – 1991), British Hawker Sidderley Buccaneers (Period of Service: 1965 – 199) and French Dassault-Breguet Mirage fighters (Period of Service: 1965 – 1986) and the army used Belgian FN rifles and machine guns and British-made Alvis Saracen "88″ Prototype used extensively to suppress riots in the townships – yet neither Younge nor the Guardian claims that these massive amounts of weaponry, dwarfing anything Israel may have provided, imply that Britain, France and Belgium are or were apartheid states.

9. Perhaps most significant if not obvious of all: there is no evidence that Israel ever sold Jericho missiles to South Africa or that Israel sold nuclear weapons to South Africa (South Africa ended up developing them themselves).

Finally, there are two additional points worth noting regarding the Guardian's endless desire to blacken Israel's name at every opportunity.

First, Chris McGreal is now supposed to be the Guardian's Washington correspondent, but like all good Guardianistas cannot let go of his hatred of Israel. Like a mongrel returning to a bone he has to keep on gnawing at Israel. Even when posted into the capital of the most powerful country in the world, where world affairs such as the global economy might, one would think, pique his interest, his concern is trying to drag up dirt on Israel.

Secondly, the Guardian, as it does so frequently, rushes to judgment with a story before it checks the most basic facts, and lavishes on it exaggerations, innuendo, and false claims. Belatedly, it now has to grudgingly print rebuttals by Peres and Avner Cohen, after regurgitating someone else's news on CiF, as McGreal has done with Polakow-Suransky's book.

Ami Isseroff: de Amerikaans-Joodse gemeenschap en Israel

In de VS is een heftige discussie aan de gang over de relatie van de Joodse gemeenschap met Israel. Hieronder geeft Ami Isseroff, die in de VS is opgegroeid, zijn visie. Waar komt alle controverse vandaan en wanneer is het begonnen? En waarom wordt Israels legitimiteit nu, ook in de VS, zo veelvuldig ter discussie gesteld? Hoe 'spontaan' zijn alle protesten tegen 'Israelische Apartheid', 'disproportioneel geweld', 'oorlogsmisdaden' etc.?

 

RP

-----------

 

What is really happening? For the thirty three years prior to the outbreak of violence in 2000, American Jews were largely complacent about Israel. It was just another place, doing fairly well. Even the infamous U.N. Zionism is Racism resolution had been repealed. The old pre-1967 world where Israel's existence was endangered was gone. Everyone could believe that Israel was here to stay and no special advocacy or support was required from the American Jewish community. The Palestinian suicide bombers of 2000 were accompanied by a planned diplomatic and ideological assault on Israeli legitimacy and on Zionism. 

(...)

A part of this assault specifically targeted liberal American Jews. Hisham Sharabi, a Palestinian activist, made this self-fulfilling "prophecy" in 1998:

Popular resistance, which is likely to bring back the intifada, will simultaneously lead to building alliances and grassroots organizations.... If this succeeds by the turn of the century, this new post-patriarchal liberation struggle will regain the human face of the first intifada and win the support of progressive forces the world over, including the support of progressive Jewish forces in Israel and the United States.

The "grass roots" effort was indeed orchestrated and organized carefully. An organization called "Al-Awda," (the Return) appeared on cue and began preaching that giving up the Right of Return of Palestinian refugees was treason. The ISM and PSM groups were set up to coordinate the efforts to delegitimize Israel and crank out justifications of Palestinian terror and sabotage of the peace process for the faithful. The Jewish Voice for Peace and Jews for Justice in Palestine in Britain and numerous other non-Jewish organizations, both "progressive" and frankly anti-Semitic, joined forces. The Durban conference on Racism held in 2001 was a grand kick-off for this well-organized "spontaneous" grass roots effort. "Zionism is Racism" and "Apartheid Israel" Web sites, pamphlets, articles, books, demonstrations and university weeks sprung up seemingly from nowhere, like poisonous mushrooms after a rain. The "resistance" movements did their part, sending suicide bombers to murder Israelis and forcing a security crackdown, which could then be used to fuel more self-righteous propaganda about Israeli war crimes and the oppressive occupation.

 

Uit: The Success of the American Jewish Establishment (lees het hele artikel)

 

Zie ook het voorgaande artikel van Ami Isseroff:

The Failure of American Jewish Liberalism

 

En het navolgende artikel van Ami Isseroff:

The real split in the American Jewish Community

 

 

Nieuwe Free Gaza vloot op weg om Hamas te steunen

 

Wederom is een vloot met 'mensenrechten-activisten' op weg naar Gaza om de Hamas terroristen de hand te schudden en er lachend mee op de foto te gaan (zie laatste halve minuut van de video). Tegenstrijdig? Volgens Stop de Bezetting (geen link) en andere 'fellow-travellers' van Hamas is de islamitische verzetsbeweging de legitieme en democratisch gekozen regering van de Palestijnen, die er ook eens redelijk goed in slaagt de orde in Gaza te handhaven, en die de corrupte en met de Joden zionisten collaborerende Fatah haar plaats heeft gewezen.

 

Hieronder een video van een Israeli die een en ander verheldert, en daaronder een weerwoord vanuit de Israelische overheid over een onverwachte hulpverlener aan de belegerde bevolking van de Gazastrook.

Wouter

________________

 

 

Dit is wat de Gaza boot activisten steunen...

Waarschuwing: tussen minuut 1 en 2 zijn de beelden nogal bloederig!

Met dank aan: http://www.israned.com/2010/05/bevrijd-gaza.html 

 

=====================

·    Since last year's January cease fire, 133 million liters of fuel entered Gaza from Israel - That's more than enough fuel to fill the fuel tank of every car and truck in Israel!

·        Since the ceasefire, well over a million tons of humanitarian supplies entered Gaza from Israel - That's almost a ton of aid for every man woman and child in Gaza.

·         Israel transfers food, medicines, clothing and school-books for all Gazans, but Hamas demands concrete for its reinforced bunkers, from which they will be able to continue to fire rockets at Israeli schools and hospitals.  Nevertheless, despite the need to restrict the supply of building materials for this reason, Israel has this week allowed 6 trucks loaded with 250 tons of cement, one truck loaded with 5 tons of iron and 15 trucks loaded with gravels to enter Gaza for building projects operated and executed by UNRWA.

·        Israel transfers 15,000 tons of real aid to Gaza each and every week – so a flotilla claiming to carry 10,000 tons of concrete is clearly about a different agenda.

·        International aid groups send their aid to Gaza through the Israeli humanitarian pipeline, while publicity seekers merely exploit the humanitarian agenda to promote their own media stunts.

·        In 2009 alone, 10,544 patients and their companions left the Gaza Strip for medical treatment in Israel.

·        Humanitarian aid flows into Gaza daily, except when the crossings are rocketed by the Hamas regime.

·        In 2009, 21,200 international organization staff members entered the Gaza Strip, and some 4,883 tons of medical equipment and medicine were brought in.

·        In a typical week the IDF coordinates the transfer of hundreds of trucks containing about 15,000 tons of supplies: during the week of May 18, 2010 there were 65 trucks of fruit and vegetables; 22 truckloads of sugar, some 27 truckloads of meat, poultry and fish; and 40 trucks of dairy products and more than 100 truckloads of animal food.

·        During the first quarter of 2010 some 553 tons or 40 trucks of milk powder and baby food were shipped to the Strip. One hundred and eight trucks of rice, 164 trucks of clothing and shoes, 1,115 trucks of wheat and 1,753 trucks of various food products including vegetables and cheese went through. These items were channeled through aid organizations or via the private sector.

·        In 2009, more than 738,000 tons of food and supplies entered Gaza.  During holidays, Israel increases transfers. During the Muslim feast Eid al-Adha, Israel shipped some 11,000 head of cattle into the Strip.

·        Israel is now coordinating the transfer of 200,000 laptops for Gaza schoolchildren.

Maintaining Medical Aid for all in Need  

·        No Palestinian is denied medical care in Israel.  Israel maintains a corridor for the transfer of medical patients out of Gaza, and about 200 medical staff go through the crossings every month.

·        Israel helps coordinate the transfer of Jordanian doctors into Gaza.

·        In 2009 alone, 10,544 patients and their companions left the Gaza Strip for medical treatment in Israel.

·        The Israeli Hadassah Medical Organization in Jerusalem donates $3 million in aid annually to treat Palestinians in Israel.

·        Since 2005, Palestinians exploited medical care arrangements more than 20 times to carry out terror attacks.

·        In the first quarter of 2010, Israel shipped 152 trucks of medical supplies and equipment into Gaza.

        A new CAT scan machine was recently shipped to Gaza.

·        In a typical week (in May 2010), some 37 truckloads of hygiene products were shipped to Gaza.

·        In 2009, 21,200 international organization staff members entered the Gaza Strip, and some 4,883 tons of medical equipment and medicine were brought in.

 

'Intifada-Harry' mobiliseert medestanders voor CIDI-debat

 

Harry van Bommel is nogal een fanaat, en hij en Anja M. zijn de twee belangrijkste redenen waarom ik al jaren geen SP meer stem.

"Stop de Bezetting" (geen link) is helemaal van de pot gerukt; het blijft me verbazen hoeveel leugens en opruiing een groep in Nederland anno 2010 kan verspreiden zonder wegens antisemitisme te worden verboden.

 

Wouter

_____________

 

 

'Intifada-Harry' mobiliseert medestanders voor CIDI-debat

http://www.israned.com/2010/05/intifada-harry-mobiliseert-medestanders.html

 

 

De politicus Harry van Bommel heeft zich na de verontwaardiging wegens zijn intifada-oproep lange tijd verre gehouden van al te Joodse bijeenkomsten, maar neemt nu toch dapper deel aan het grote CIDI-verkiezingsdebat op 1 juni. Onderwerp van het debat wordt het Midden-Oosten, inclusief Israel en Iran. Van Bommel is blijkbaar toch bang dat hij er alleen voor komt te staan. Via het forum van zijn vriendin, Stop de Bezetting (geen link), en door e-mails is hij nu een grote campagne begonnen om medestanders naar dit debat te lokken.

 

Die angst voor eenzaamheid is wel enigszins begrijpelijk. Op een deel van zijn bejaarde kornuiten kan Van Bommel alvast niet rekenen: die zijn op de  'vredesreis' voor 70-plussers met Van Agt. (Als zij dan nog niet hebben gezorgd dat ze als persona non grata terug gestuurd zijn tenminste.) Hoe Van Bommel hulp van achter de tafel kan organiseren is ook al onzeker; Groen Links heeft het blijkbaar laten afweten.

 

Niettemin is dit een uitgelezen kans om Van Bommel eens te laten zien dat zijn eenzijdige opvattingen echt niet zo algemeen worden gedragen als hij wel hoopt: op naar de Amsterdamse Balie dus op 1 juni (wel snel even opgeven bij cididebat@gmail.com, want het kan nog druk worden daar).

 

=======================================

1 juni Groot CIDI-verkiezingsdebat

di 18-05-2010

 

Op dinsdag 1 juni organiseren CIDI, het Nederlands Iran Comité en CiJo een groot verkiezingsdebat over Israel, het Midden-Oosten en Iran.

• MOET ER EEN KERNWAPENVRIJ MIDDEN-OOSTEN KOMEN? •
• HOE BETEUGELEN WE IRAN? •
• OPLOSSING PALESTIJNS-ISRAELISCH CONFLICT : 1, 2 OF 3 STATEN?

Met: Maarten Haverkamp (CDA), Joël Voordewind (CU), Atzo Nicolai (VVD), Boris v.d. Ham (D66), Martijn van Dam (PvdA), Raymond de Roon (PVV) en Harry van Bommel (SP).
Discussieleiders: columnist Arend Jan Boekestijn en journalist Leonard Ornstein.
Plaats: de Balie, Kleine-Gartmanplantsoen 10, Amsterdam. Tijd: 20.00 - 22.00 uur. Toegang: gratis.

Europese Unie overweegt erkenning Palestijnse Staat

 

De Palestijnse Autoriteit heeft haar strategie veranderd en probeert nu internationale steun te krijgen voor een eenzijdig uit te roepen staat in 2011. Het voordeel daarvan is dat men het niet met Israel eens hoeft te worden over lastige zaken, en geen concessies hoeft te doen aan Israel. Als deze staat door de VN en de meeste landen erkend zal worden, wordt Israel vanzelf gedwongen deze nieuwe realiteit ook te erkennen en de bezetting op te geven. De EU lijkt er wel voor te voelen:

 

In an earlier interview with the Paris-based Journal du Dimanche, Kouchner said: "The issue currently before us is the building of a reality. France is training Palestinian police and businesses are being created in the West Bank.... It follows that one can envision the proclamation soon of a Palestinian state, and its immediate recognition by the international community, even before negotiating its borders."

Kouchner added: "If by mid-2011, the political process has not ended the [Israeli] occupation, I would bet that the developed state of Palestinian infrastructure and institutions will be such that the pressure will force Israel to give up its occupation."

(...)

In July 2009, then-EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana gave a speech to the Ditchley Foundation in London in which he said that Israel and the Palestinian Authority should be given a deadline by which to conclude negotiations for a two-state solution. If a final status agreement is not reached by that time, Solana recommended that one be imposed by the United Nations, whether Israel agrees to it or not.

"After a fixed deadline, a UN Security Council resolution should proclaim the adoption of the two-state solution," Solana said. "It would accept the Palestinian state as a full member of the UN, and set a calendar for implementation. It would mandate the resolution of other remaining territorial disputes and legitimize the end of claims."

 

Het probleem hiermee is dat alleen druk op Israel wordt uitgeoefend en alle druk juist van de PA wordt afgehaald.

 

But increased American and European pressure on Israel may end up encouraging the Palestinians to toughen their stance and thus undermine the prospects for a negotiated settlement. Indeed, many analysts believe the recent moves by the EU are an effort to pre-empt any possible resumption of Middle East peace talks by helping the Palestinians improve their negotiating position vis-à-vis Israel.

 

Het is de vraag of deze nieuwe staat vrede zal sluiten met Israel en zich aan afspraken zal houden. Zij is immers niet het product van onderhandelingen en overeenstemming met Israel, maar van een aan Israel opgelegd internationaal besluit, met of zonder VN troepenmacht om een en ander in de praktijk te regelen. Het is dan ook geen recept voor vrede, maar voor oorlog.

 

Als er een deadline gesteld gaat worden, moet die voor beide partijen gelden, en moet die niet voor een van beide juist aanlokkelijk zijn, en daarmee de motivatie om voor die tijd tot overeenstemming te komen, geheel wegnemen. Overigens heeft alle internationale bemoeienis veel schade aangericht, en is de idee dat 'omdat beide partijen er zelf niet uitkomen de internationale gemeenschap het maar moet regelen' niet juist. Er is altijd veel internationale druk en invloed geweest, en het heeft de vrede nog niet dichterbij gebracht.

 

RP

-----------

 

Europe Mulls Recognition of Palestinian State

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/4418
From the desk of Soeren Kern on Thu, 2010-05-06 07:16
 

France and Spain are laying the political groundwork for the European Union to recognize a Palestinian state ­possibly as early as October 2011 even if negotiations for a permanent settlement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority are not concluded.

The initiative is being spearheaded by French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner and his Spanish counterpart Miguel Ángel Moratinos, whose country currently holds the six-month rotating presidency of the European Union.

Palestinian Authority leaders Mahmoud Abbas and Salam Fayyad have repeatedly said they intend to unilaterally declare Palestinian independence before the end of 2011, with or without a peace deal. Abbas and Fayyad have been visiting European capitals in recent months to drum up political and financial support for Palestinian statehood.

Kouchner and Moratinos laid out their vision for Europe's role in creating a Palestinian state in a recent opinion article titled "A Palestinian State: When?" The article, which was published in French by the center-left newspaper Le Monde, reminds readers that the European Union is the biggest single provider of financial aid to the Palestinians. Often described as a "payer but not a player" in the Middle East, the authors argue that the European Union must work more aggressively in bringing about Palestinian statehood.

The authors argue that time is of the essence and that the European Union "must not confine itself to the … outlines of the final settlement" and "should collectively recognize the Palestinian State.… There is no more time to lose. Europe must pave the way." The authors say the upcoming twentieth anniversary of the Madrid peace conference, which was convened in October 1991, would be a good moment to recognize Palestinian independence.

In an earlier interview with the Paris-based Journal du Dimanche, Kouchner said: "The issue currently before us is the building of a reality. France is training Palestinian police and businesses are being created in the West Bank.... It follows that one can envision the proclamation soon of a Palestinian state, and its immediate recognition by the international community, even before negotiating its borders."

Kouchner added: "If by mid-2011, the political process has not ended the [Israeli] occupation, I would bet that the developed state of Palestinian infrastructure and institutions will be such that the pressure will force Israel to give up its occupation."

Moratinos has said that Madrid sees the foundation of a Palestinian state as one of its main priorities under its six-month leadership of the EU. "We in the international community are all defending the two-state solution. Why should we wait for a Palestinian state? We have Israel as a state, we want its neighbour, the Palestinians, to have the same status," Moratinos said. "My idea, and my dream, and my engagement, is to work for having in 2010, finally, a Palestinian state that could live in peace and security with Israel," he said.

It remains to be seen how Spain's current EU presidency will affect the EU's relations with Israel. The government of Socialist Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero (as well as the previous EU rotating presidency, which was held by Sweden) has often raised eyebrows over its consistently antagonistic approach toward the Jewish state.

During the Swedish EU presidency (July 1, 2009 to December 31, 2009) the EU adopted a resolution that for the first time explicitly called for Jerusalem to become the future capital of both a Palestinian state and Israel. Backing away only slightly from a more controversial Swedish proposal to officially call for the division of Jerusalem, the EU declared: "If there is to be a genuine peace, a way must be found through negotiations to resolve the status of Jerusalem as the future capital of two states."

The original proposal drafted by Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt, well-known for his pro-Palestinian leanings, had called for the creation of a "State of Palestine with East Jerusalem as its capital." That proposal had the backing of the Zapatero government. Israeli officials, angry over EU efforts to prejudge the outcome of issues reserved for permanent status negotiations, persuaded French diplomats to remove the offending text, as well as other references to a Palestinian state that would comprise "the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and Gaza."

The Palestinians claim all of the West Bank and east Jerusalem ­ areas captured by Israel in the 1967 Mideast war ­ as part of their future state. The Palestinians have demanded that Israel halt all settlement construction in the two areas before peace talks can resume. But Israel has always maintained that Jerusalem will remain its undivided capital, regardless of any future peace settlement with the Palestinians. This has been the declared policy of all Israeli governments, both left and right.

In July 2009, then-EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana gave a speech to the Ditchley Foundation in London in which he said that Israel and the Palestinian Authority should be given a deadline by which to conclude negotiations for a two-state solution. If a final status agreement is not reached by that time, Solana recommended that one be imposed by the United Nations, whether Israel agrees to it or not.

"After a fixed deadline, a UN Security Council resolution should proclaim the adoption of the two-state solution," Solana said. "It would accept the Palestinian state as a full member of the UN, and set a calendar for implementation. It would mandate the resolution of other remaining territorial disputes and legitimize the end of claims."

Solana added that the UN-imposed two-state solution should include resolution of issues such as control over Jerusalem, as well as border definitions, security arrangements and the "right of return" by millions of foreign descendants of Arab refugees who abandoned their homes during the 1948 war.

In March 2010, the new EU foreign policy chief, Lady Catherine Ashton, used a visit to Gaza to increase EU pressure on Israel. "Recent Israeli decisions to build new housing units in East Jerusalem have endangered and undermined the tentative agreement to begin proximity talks," she said. She also criticized the three-year-old blockade of the Gaza Strip and the recent Israeli decision to include Islamic religious sites in occupied territories on a list of Israeli heritage sites, describing both moves as "counter-productive." Ashton also said the EU is ready to provide the Palestinians with more money.

Meanwhile, a group of British lawmakers have asked the government to halt arms sales to Israel after a report published by the House of Commons Committee on Arms Export Controls stated: "It is regrettable that arms exports to Israel were almost certainly used by Israel during Operation Cast Lead." The report also says that arms exports to Israel should never be used in the "occupied Palestinian territories, as this violates the policy of the United Kingdom."

Anglo-Israeli relations hit a new low in March after the British government expelled an Israeli diplomat over the use of forged UK passports in the January killing of a Hamas official in a hotel in Dubai. British Foreign Secretary David Miliband said Israel's behaviour was "intolerable."

Israeli government officials are concerned about the steady deterioration in Israel-EU relations. According to the Tel Aviv-based newspaper Haaretz, Foreign Ministry Director-General Yossi Gal recently held a conference call with seven of Israel's ambassadors to European capitals. The envoys said they expected European governments to seize on the current crisis in Israel's relations with the United States and go even further in condemning Israel and promoting diplomatic initiatives detrimental to Israel.

In fact, Israeli officials believe that US President Barack Obama, in pursuing a more antagonistic policy toward Israel, is not only imitating the European approach to the Middle East, but is actually coordinating policy with European governments. According to Haaretz, the White House and State Department have been in contact with Israel's European allies, including Germany, in an effort to isolate Israel and increase the political pressure on Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

But increased American and European pressure on Israel may end up encouraging the Palestinians to toughen their stance and thus undermine the prospects for a negotiated settlement. Indeed, many analysts believe the recent moves by the EU are an effort to pre-empt any possible resumption of Middle East peace talks by helping the Palestinians improve their negotiating position vis-à-vis Israel.

This is already happening. For example, senior officials in Fatah, which governs the West Bank, have recently reversed a negotiations-only approach and have called for increased Palestinian protests against Israel.

In the meantime, the Palestinian Authority is using European money to implement an ambitious program to reform the Palestinian government and security forces, build up Palestinian institutions and develop the economy. The EU is praising the reforms, but Israel suspects the plan to build up the institutions and infrastructure of a viable state may be a precursor to a unilateral declaration of independence.
 

Soeren Kern is Senior Fellow for Transatlantic Relations at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group.

 

 

 

Hamas en Islamitische Jihad terroristen kregen geld de gevangenis binnen gesmokkeld

 

Ik heb mij er vaker over verbaasd hoe terroristen er vanuit Israelische gevangenissen in slagen om door te gaan met het organiseren van (zelfmoord)aanslagen. Israel heeft nu 7 Arabieren uit Oost Jeruzalem opgepakt en beschuldigd van het doorspelen van grote sommen geld aan gevangenen. Zij kunnen vrijelijk door heel Israel reizen, en sinds kort mogen Arabieren uit Jeruzalem en de rest van Israel ook de gebieden onder de Palestijnse Autoriteit bezoeken. Hoe die gevangenen met dat geld aanslagen organiseren, snap ik overigens nog niet helemaal, maar uit een en ander blijkt dat het regime in de gevangenissen niet zo heel erg strikt kan zijn en de controles niet waterdicht.

 

Er is overigens onlangs een wet aangenomen die het regime specifiek voor gedetineerden van Hamas versobert, in de hoop zo de druk op te voeren om een deal te sluiten over de vrijlating van Gilad Shalit. Ik heb zo mijn twijfels of dat zal werken, en alhoewel ik het sentiment erachter begrijp, dreig je jezelf zo ook naar het niveau van je vijanden te verlagen (al zullen de gevangenen in Israel nog steeds betere condities hebben dan Shalit, alleen al omdat bekend is waar ze zitten en ze bezocht kunnen worden door het Rode Kruis). Het tegengaan van de organisatie van aanslagen en andere ongein vind ik eerlijk gezegd een beter motief om het regime aan te scherpen.

 

RP

-------------

 

The Jerusalem Post

Shin Bet: 7 gave terrorists funds

By YAAKOV LAPPIN AND JPOST.COM STAFF
05/24/2010 14:47

http://www.jpost.com/Home/Article.aspx?id=176296

 

Shin Bet: East Jerusalem ring passed money, files to prisoners.

 

 

Israeli security officials on Monday revealed more details about seven east Jerusalem residents accused of passing funds to jailed Hamas and Islamic Jihad prisoners.

The suspected group leader, lawyer Shirin Isawiya, was arrested at a checkpoint outside Jerusalem on April 22, 2010 with $100,000 and NIS 53,000 in cash as well a USB key. On the USB key, security officials found documents from imprisoned leaders of Hamas and Islamic Jihad. 

Following Isawiya's arrest, the Shin Bet (Israeli Security Agency) discovered other members of the smuggling ring, including Shirin's brothers Madhat Isawiya, a 37 year-old Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine activist who was released from an Israeli prison in 2009, and 16 year-old Rafat Isawiya. Both brothers come from the east Jerusalem neighborhood of Issawiya.

The others suspects caught in the investigation were Salim Abed al-Rahma, a post office manager in Atarot; a post office work in A-tor, near Jerusalem; Sufayeen Zabda, a lawyer who is said to have served as a courier from Gaza; and Malsem Hala'ila, who also was a courier from Gaza.

The couriers in the group are accused of transferring tens of thousands of dollars weekly from Hamas and Islamic Jihad affiliated charities in Gaza to Israel.

Security officials elaborated that the group of seven succeeded in funneling millions of shekels to security prisoners through postal bank accounts registered with both fake identity numbers and the numbers of deceased Gazan residents.

Prison regulations limit monthly funds transfers to prisoners to NIS 1300 per month.

"This will strike a serious blow to Hamas and Islamic Jihad and their attempts to coordinate terror activities from prison," a security official said.

 

 

Boycot Israel door Elvis Costello geen bijdrage aan vreedzame toekomst

 

Leaving nothing to instinct, and still keeping her conscience clean, Atwood noted that "cultural boycotts serve no good purpose if one of the hopes for the future is that peace and normal exchanges and even something resembling normal living conditions will be restored."
She also perceptively added that "moderates who want to promote dialogue always get hammered twice as much, as they get stones thrown at them from several directions at once."

 

Het is jammer dat zoveel mensen, vooral links geëngageerden, zich laten (mis)leiden door gemakzuchtige sentimenten en de huidige anti-Israel mode, en niet de helderheid van geest hebben van de hierboven geciteerde Canadese schrijfster Margaret Atwood.

Zie voor meer argumenten tegen boycots van Israel: Boycot Israël? Of waarom een boycot van Israel niet bijdraagt aan vrede.

 

RP

------------

 

The Jerusalem Post

Reality Check: About these boycotts

By JEFF BARAK
05/24/2010 07:26

While Elvis Costello made the wrong call in cancelling his gigs here - the PA-sponsored boycott of Israeli goods is less clear cut.

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContributors/Article.aspx?id=176264

In the late 1970s, Elvis Costello sang that he didn't want to go to Chelsea, and last week he decided he didn't want to come to Israel either and perform in Caesarea as originally planned later next month. In a long-winded statement on his Web site, typical of the problems pop stars have when trying to articulate a political position, Costello could only explain his decision "as a matter of instinct and conscience."

It's a shame he didn't first take a look at Canadian novelist Margaret Atwood's clearly argued statement explaining why she, in the face of calls to boycott Israel, had decided to come to Tel Aviv to accept the Dan David Prize earlier this month.

Leaving nothing to instinct, and still keeping her conscience clean, Atwood noted that "cultural boycotts serve no good purpose if one of the hopes for the future is that peace and normal exchanges and even something resembling normal living conditions will be restored."

She also perceptively added that "moderates who want to promote dialogue always get hammered twice as much, as they get stones thrown at them from several directions at once."

Atwood came under heavy pressure not to visit and the intellectual rigor and strength of character with which she repelled these attacks are worthy of respect. Culture Minister Limor Livnat would do well to study Atwood's remarks and use them as a riposte to those considering boycotting this country. The minister's childish response to Costello – "an artist who boycotts his Israeli fan base is not worthy of performing in front of them" – was really quite pathetic.

The calls for a boycott are not going to go away, and Israeli cultural leaders need to be able to argue cogently against them. Banning intellectuals such as Noam Chomsky from entering was not a promising first step in this direction. And Israelis who have crossed Turkey off their list of holiday destinations this summer due to disquiet with Turkish government statements also need to ask themselves if they can in all honestly criticize Costello.

WHILE COSTELLO made the wrong call in cancelling his gigs here – he should have come, and visited the West Bank if he felt the need to make a political statement – the appropriateness of the Palestinian Authority-sponsored boycott of Israeli goods made in the West Bank is less clear cut. On an individual level, there is nothing wrong in a Palestinian consumer choosing a Palestinian-made, or indeed any other product over that produced by an Israeli company with a factory based in the West Bank or the Golan Heights.

Consumer choice is one aspect of freedom and if a Palestinian shopper prefers to boycott Israeli goods as part of a national effort to promote the Palestinian economy then it is hard to disagree with that choice. Indeed, let's not forget that Israelis, every time they turn on the radio, are exhorted in adverts to buy blue-and-white in order to protect Israeli jobs or warned that every time an Israeli employs an illegal foreign worker, they are taking a job away from an Israeli.

Some arguments against the Palestinian economic boycott verge on the tenuous. The manufacturers' claim that they are providing jobs for the around 20,000 Palestinians who would otherwise be unemployed might have some factual basis, but ignores the real reason for their basing their factories there: the winning combination of cheap land and cheap labor. Were labor costs and rents the same in the territories as they are in Israel, these manufacturers' concern for Palestinian employment figures would soon disappear.

BUT THERE are a number of problematic aspects to this boycott, the most glaring being Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad's participation in the demonstrative burning of Israeli products made in the West Bank.

If Fayyad is not aware of the dark symbolism of burning Jewish-made products, that is one cause for regret; if he is aware of it and yet continues to throw Israeli goods into the flames, this is a cause for concern and seriously damages his image as a moderate with whom Israel can do business.

As Atwood noted, such acts serve "no good purpose" if one hopes for a better future.

An official Palestinian boycott of Israeli products made in the territories is also a political act that does not contribute to the positive atmosphere needed to help the recently launched proximity talks. Palestinian traders selling Israeli-made goods produced in the West Bank reportedly face fines of up to $14,000 or even prison which, while not a "hostile act" as the Council of Jewish Communities in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip would have us believe, is still a serious violation of the spirit of the economic agreements made between Israel and the Palestinians during the Oslo period.

The Palestinians have drawn up a list of goods that they have identified as being manufactured in the West Bank and Golan Heights and distributed it to Palestinian households. The PA should leave it at that, relying on persuasion, not punishment, to allow consumers to make their choice. An official boycott is not a harbinger of the open society to which Palestinians aspire.

And as for Elvis Costello, he should at least come to Israel in August to watch his wife, the Canadian jazz pianist and singer Diana Krall, perform in Ra'anana.

The writer is a former editor-in-chief of  The Jerusalem Post.

Komt Dries van Agt op Ben Gurion Airport

 

"Ik houd er rekening mee dat ik geweigerd kan worden. De rest van de delegatie zal de reis gewoon voortzetten. Ik ga in dat geval naar huis en stampij maken in de pers," aldus de 79-jarige Van Agt die in 2009 zijn boek Een schreeuw om recht publiceerde waarin hij de "onrechtvaardige strijd" tussen de Israël en Palestina beschrijft.

"Reken maar dat men in Israel op de hoogte is van de inhoud van mijn boek. De inhoud wordt ongetwijfeld gezien als verderfelijk en onzinnig om zijn pro-Palestijnse houding. Als Chomsky al geweigerd wordt dan mag Dries van Agt uit Holland niet verwachten dat hij met open armen wordt ontvangen."

http://www.nu.nl/algemeen/2253111/van-agt-provoceert-israel-met-midden-oosten-reis.html

Aldus Dries van Agt, die komende week met andere kritische politici naar Israel gaat om zich ervan te overtuigen hoe verderfelijk de zionistische entiteit is en hoe lelieblank de Palestijnen. Ik waag te betwijfelen of iemand van de security bij Ben-Goerion Airport ooit van Van Agt heeft gehoord. Ik denk niet dat hij op enige zwarte lijst staat, en als er iets mis gaat bij de controles zal dat zeer waarschijnlijk liggen aan Van Agts provocatieve gedrag. Als men hem vraagt wat hij in Israel komt doen zal hij wellicht demonstratief antwoorden:

"Weet u wel wie ik ben? Ik ben oud-premier van Nederland, dat land dat altijd schandalig pro-Israel was. En weet u wat? Ik deed daar volop aan mee! Ook ik dacht dat jullie werden bedreigd door je buren en je slechts verdedigden tegen de nieuwe nazi's die jullie de zee in wilden drijven. Wij allen voelden ons bovendien zeer bezwaard vanwege de verschrikkingen in de tweede wereldoorlog, en durfden daarom nauwelijks een kritisch woord tegenover Israel te uiten. Laat u mij alstublieft even uitspreken. Pas lang nadat ik uit de actieve politiek ben gestapt zag ik het licht, en zag ik wie hier dader en slachtoffer is. Ik ben mij daarin gaan verdiepen en verzet mij sindsdien hevig tegen het onrecht dat gij die arme Palestijnen aandoet. Ik publiceer geregeld artikelen in Nederlandse media, heb een website en vorig jaar is mijn boek "Een schreeuw om recht" uitgekomen. Ik neem overigens aan dat ik u niks nieuws vertel, en de Israelische inlichtingendienst u dit alles reeds heeft verteld, maar ik vertel het u graag in mijn eigen woorden. Vraagt u mij dus niet wat ik hier kom doen en stoor mij niet langer bij het uitvoeren van mijn belangrijke werk. U zou mij eigenlijk dankbaar moeten zijn, en weet u wat? Sommige van mijn beste vrienden zijn Joden, dus noem mij alstublieft geen antisemiet. Zij zeggen zelden zo'n groots en dapper persoon te hebben ontmoet als ik, de Nederlandse Jimmy Carter. En laat mij nu door altublieft, voor ik boos wordt."

Een bijzondere variant van het Jeruzalem syndroom?

RP

 

PA: terrorist Abu Jihad rolmodel voor Palestijnse kinderen

 

Abu Jihad was de mastermind achter een van de dodelijkste aanslagen in Israel, een buskaping waarbij 37 burgers, waaronder meer dan tien kinderen, werden gedood. Deze kindermoordenaar wordt de Palestijnse kinderen nu als rolmodel voorgehouden. Het is een nationaal gebruik onder Palestijnen om straten, pleinen, zomerkampen, scholen, sportevenementen etc. naar terroristen te vernoemen, niet naar mensen die zich voor vrede hebben ingezet of beroemde schrijvers of anderen die een constructieve bijdrage aan de Palestijnse samenleving hebben geleverd. De cynische conclusie zou kunnen zijn dat men blijkbaar niet veel anderen heeft om trots op te zijn, en dat de weinige echte vredesactivisten niet als helden maar als verraders worden gezien.

 

RP

------------

 

PMW Bulletin / May 17, 2010

 

PA kids told to "follow same path" as terrorist
Fatah representative at sports event
instructs kids to see Abu Jihad as role model
http://palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&doc_id=2251

By Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik

 

The Palestinian Authority continues to use sporting events to glorify terrorists and present them as role models for children. This week, a football tournament named after terrorist Abu Jihad was sponsored by Fatah in a town near Jerusalem, while the lottery for another football tournament named after terrorist Abdallah Daoud took place in Bethlehem. In the Gaza Strip, a football tournament featured a team named after the terrorist Majed Abu Sharar.  

A Fatah representative spoke at the "Shahid (Martyr) Abu Jihad tournament," and told the children that they should see the terrorist as a role model:

"He reminded our children that we shall follow the same path of Abu Jihad and Yasser Arafat."

Abu Jihad headed PLO's military wing, and was responsible for the deaths of dozens of Israeli civilians. Among other attacks, he directed the worst terror attack in Israel's history, in which 37 were killed in a bus hijacking.

The lottery for a football tournament named after terrorist Abdallah Daoud was held in Bethlehem. Daoud was responsible for many terror attacks, and was one of the terrorists who stormed the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem in 2002, using the monks and the religious site as shields.  

A football tournament held in the Gaza Strip included the "Shahid (Martyr) Majed Abu Sharar" team. Majed Abu Sharar was a senior Fatah and PLO terror leader in the 1970s.   

Click to see the new Palestinian Media Watch report, From Terrorists to Role Models, documenting the Palestinian Authority policy of naming sites and events after terrorists.

Following Palestinian Media Watch bulletins exposing this Palestinian Authority practice, the US has strongly condemned PA's honoring of terrorists:

State Department Spokesperson Philip Crowley:

"We also strongly condemn the glorification of terrorists. Honoring terrorists who have murdered innocent civilians, either by official statements or by the dedication of public places, hurts peace efforts and must end." [April 8, 2010]

Ambassador Alejandro D. Wolff, U.S. Deputy Representative to the UN:

"We strongly condemn the glorification of terrorists, either through official statements or by the dedication of public places." [April 14, 2010]

The following are this week's announcements in the PA media about the three tournaments:

Fatah holds Martyr Abu Jihad tournament near Jerusalem

"Yesterday evening the second Shahid (Martyr) Abu Jihad [football] tournament for children concluded at the Abu Dis [near Jerusalem] youth club; it is held annually under the auspices of Fatah...

Abu Halal (Fatah branch Secretary) spoke about the anniversary of the Martyrdom of the Shahid (Martyr) commander, Khalil Al-Wazir 'Abu Jihad,' and about his journey of struggle. He reminded our children that we shall follow the same path of Abu Jihad and Yasser Arafat."

[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, May 16, 2010]

Lottery for the Martyr Abdallah Daoud tournament

"The lottery for the football tournament, named after the Shahid (Martyr) Abdallah Daoud Abu Al-Qassam, was held yesterday at the joint operations headquarters in the Bethlehem district. Participating in the tournament are teams representing the security services in the Bethlehem district."

[Al-Ayyam, May 17, 2010]

Tournament held in Gaza Strip includes "Martyr Majed Abu Sharar" team

"The [football] tournament trophy finals were held between the Al-Zarnuka team and the Shahid (Martyr) Majed Abu Sharar team."

[PA TV (Fatah), May 14, 2010]

Click to view examples on PMW's website of PA terrorist glorification.

 

 

Video over proef 'racistische stoplichten' in Jeruzalem

 

Een paar weken geleden besteedden we aandacht aan de Palestijnse aantijging dat men in Jeruzalem veel langer voor een rood stoplicht moet wachten dan de 'kolonisten'.

 

De nieuwste aantijging tegen Israël luidt dat de stoplichten in Jeruzalem racistisch zijn: ze staan veel langer op rood voor de Palestijnen dan voor de 'kolonisten'. De Arabische TV-zender Al Jazeera nam de proef op de som en klokte hoe lang het stoplicht op groen staat bij een van de drukste kruispunten van de stad, als je vanuit de Arabische wijk Shuafat komt en wanneer je vanuit een van de grotere wegen aan komt rijden, die volgens Al Jazeera slechts door 'kolonisten' wordt bereden. Dat laatste is onzin, want de grote verkeersaders (waarvoor de stoplichten het langst op groen staan) verbinden zowel Arabische als Joodse wijken en worden door beide bevolkingsgroepen gebruikt.

http://www.zionism-israel.com/blog/archives/00000458.html 

 

Camera heeft de zaak onderzocht en verschillende stoplichten en kruispunten in Jerzualem geklokt. En wat blijkt? Inderdaad, soms hebben wegen die uit een Joodse wijk komen langer rood, soms die uit een Arabische wijk, afhankelijk van de drukte van de weg en de wegen die men kruist. Over het kruispunt waar vandaan Al Jazeera berichtte, is bovendien onlangs een viaduct gebouwd dat bewoners uit zowel Joodse als Arabische wijken naar het centrum voert. Zie de video hieronder.

 

Het is eigenlijk te absurd voor woorden dat Israel zich steeds tegen dergelijke idiote aantijgingen moet verweren. Mijn vurige wens is dat dit ooit niet meer nodig zal zijn, en alle energie die gaat zitten in het ontzenuwen van idiote aantijgingen, besteed kan worden aan het bedenken van creatieve oplossingen voor het conflict en de vele werkelijke problemen die Israel heeft.

 

RP

 

Bron:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ectEf4eteZE

 

Elvis Costello en de boycot van Israel

 

Twee weken geleden nog zei Costello tegen de Jerusalem Post:

 

"I know from the experience of a friend who is from Israel and from people who have worked there that there is a difference of opinion there among Israelis regarding their government's policies. It seems to me that dialogue is essential. . . . The people who call for a boycott of Israel own the narrow view that performing there must be about profit and endorsing the hawkish policy of the government. It's like never appearing in the U.S. because you didn't like Bush's policies or boycotting England because of Margaret Thatcher." 

 

Deze dialoog doet Costello nu de das om. Ook laat hij zijn vele fans die voor vrede zijn in de steek, en versterkt de rechts-nationalisten en hun sentiment dat Israel alleen staat tegenover een vijandige wereld waarvan het geen recht hoeft te verwachten en van wiens kritiek men zich dan ook niks aan moet trekken. In de woorden van een fan:

 

Writing for the Israeli daily Ma'ariv and quoted in the Associated Press, one fan expressed exactly that: "There is an enormous group of people in Israel who are humanists and hunger for peace, who yearn for a normal life and are prepared to make painful concessions. And they are also sworn culture-lovers. . . . With this miserable decision of yours, it is this group of people you have weakened."

 

Costello's verandering van mening is wellicht niet zo spontaan als het lijkt. De pro-Palestina lobby werkt op agressieve wijze achter de schermen voor dergelijke boycots.

Zie ook: Israel boycot

 

RP

------------

Elvis Costello's Pompous (and Late-Breaking!) Boycott of Israel

 

Sarah Wildman

 

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/05/20/elvis-costellos-pompous-and-late-breaking-boycott-of-israel/

 

For a singer who croons about "peace, love and understanding," Elvis Costello has decided silence is more powerful than song. Wednesday, in a statement on his website, Costello announced he was boycotting Israel, pulling out of several already-ticketed shows scheduled for this summer in Caesarea, the Roman city on the sea, whose amphitheater hosts dozens of artists each summer.

"[T]here are occasions when merely having your name added to a concert schedule may be interpreted as a political act that resonates more than anything that might be sung and it may be assumed that one has no mind for the suffering of the innocent," Costello wrote. "I must believe that the audience for the coming concerts would have contained many people who question the policies of their government on settlement and deplore conditions that visit intimidation, humiliation or much worse on Palestinian civilians in the name of national security."

Unsurprisingly, the singer-songwriter has set off a chorus of: Excuse me, Mr. Costello, why now exactly?

It is peculiar, to say the least, that Costello discovered the occupation, or his own discomfort, or the Palestinian cause, only well after his dates were booked, his seats filled -- almost as though it made more of a statement to create and then cancel his appearances. Writing to the singer in response to his withdrawal, Alive, the Israeli artist booking agency that had wooed him to Israel, noted: "Back in February, when you confirmed the performances in Israel, you were surely aware of the situation in the Middle East . . . and the long-standing conflict between the two nations. . . . Music should be a voice of peace and brotherhood, a unifying force and should not be turned off merely because the background noises seem too loud."

Just two weeks ago, Costello told the Jerusalem Post: "I know from the experience of a friend who is from Israel and from people who have worked there that there is a difference of opinion there among Israelis regarding their government's policies. It seems to me that dialogue is essential. . . . The people who call for a boycott of Israel own the narrow view that performing there must be about profit and endorsing the hawkish policy of the government. It's like never appearing in the U.S. because you didn't like Bush's policies or boycotting England because of Margaret Thatcher."

There is also the small matter of consistency: Costello did not, for example, stop performing in the United States or the U.K. after the invasion of Iraq.

A handful of other artists have also canceled their Israel dates this summer, including Santana.

For the most part, boycotts of this nature seem, at best, counterintuitive; at worst, contrary to the aims of the boycotters. Aimed at artists or academics, they only have an impact upon those who are working to change the facts on the ground, hardening those who already on the side of peace, having no impact upon those who do not believe in peace to begin with.

Writing for the Israeli daily Ma'ariv and quoted in the Associated Press, one fan expressed exactly that: "There is an enormous group of people in Israel who are humanists and hunger for peace, who yearn for a normal life and are prepared to make painful concessions. And they are also sworn culture-lovers. . . . With this miserable decision of yours, it is this group of people you have weakened."

There are those who disagree, who say that Israeli society as a whole has to suffer until the situation on the ground for Palestinians changes. It's hard to believe, though, that Costello has much of an impact either way.