La actualidad del profeta Jeremías

Gracias a Eduardo Mosches por este envío.


A Jeremiad - Uri Avnery

01/08/09
DEAR DOV YERMIYA,
I have received the distressing letter that you recently sent to a limited number of friends. You paint the Israeli reality in dark – but true – colors, and end by cutting your ties with it.
“Therefore I, a 95 year old Sabra (native born Israeli Jew), who has plowed its fields, planted trees, built a house and fathered sons, grandsons and great-grandsons, and also shed his blood in the battle for the founding of the State of Israel,
“Declare herewith that I renounce my belief in the Zionism which has failed, that I shall not be loyal to the Jewish fascist state and its mad visions, that I shall not sing anymore its nationalist anthem, that I shall stand at attention only on the days of mourning for those fallen on both sides in the wars, and that I look with a broken heart at an Israel that is committing suicide and at the three generations of offspring that I have bred and raised in it.”
SINCE I first met you, Dov, some fifty years ago, I have always considered you the salt of the earth. You were born in a village, the son of a farmer, were a fighter in the 1948 war and later a Colonel in the army, a modest man, a moral person in every fiber.
In the first Lebanon War, you exposed the atrocities committed against the Palestinian refugees in the Tyre-Sidon area, and your courageous report shocked me no less than those of the Sabra and Shatila massacre. You did not hesitate to break the silence, as the “Breaking the Silence” youngsters are doing now, knowing full well that your peers in the officers’ corps would excommunicate you.
You are a man of my heart, Dov. That is why your words distress me so much.
I think it important to share the statement of a man of your caliber with those in our camp who spend sleepless nights worrying about the situation of our state.
YOU START your letter by mentioning the founders of the Zionist movement.
“If Herzl could come to life again and see what those who claim to carry the flag of Zionism are doing, he would flee at once, miserable and shocked, back to his grave. So would Chaim Weizmann and most of the pioneers, the fathers and mothers of my generation. They were people of conscience and morality, who held to the axiom that human beings are decent and honest.”
Most of your fierce accusations concern Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians. “And thus, for 42 years, Israel turned what should have been Palestine into a giant detention camp, and is holding a whole people captive under an oppressive and cruel regime, with the sole aim of taking away their country, come what may!!!
“The IDF eagerly suppresses their efforts at rebellion, with the active assistance of the settlement thugs, by the brutal means of a sophisticated Apartheid and a choking blockade, inhuman harassment of the sick and of women in labor, the destruction of their economy and the theft of their best land and water.
“Over all this there is waving the black flag of the frightening contempt for the life and blood of the Palestinians. Israel will never be forgiven for the terrible toll of blood spilt, and especially the blood of children, in hair-raising quantities.”
But I believe that the abysmal despair echoed in your words has other roots, too. It is a feeling that troubles the heart of many of your and my generation, the feeling that “they have stolen our state”, that there is no resemblance between the state which we dreamed of and fought for and the thing that has taken its place.
WHEN I think of our youth, yours and mine, one scene is never far from my mind: the 1947 Dalia festival.
Tens of thousands of young men and women were sitting on the slope of a hill in the natural amphitheater near Kibbutz Dalia on Mount Carmel. Ostensibly it was a festival of folk dancing, but in reality it was much more – a great celebration of the new Hebrew culture which we were then creating in the country, in which folk dancing played an important role. The dancing groups came mainly from the kibbutzim and the youth movements, and the dances were original Hebrew creations, interwoven with Russian, Polish, Yemenite and Hassidic ones. A group of Arabs danced the Debka in ecstasy, dancing and dancing and dancing on.
In the middle of the event, the loudspeakers announced that members of the UN Commission of Inquiry, which had been sent by the international organization to decide upon the future of the country, were joining us. When we saw them entering the amphitheater, the tens of thousands spontaneously rose to their feet and started to sing the “Hatikva”, the national anthem, with a holy fervor that reverberated from the surrounding mountains.
We did not know then that within half a year the great Hebrew-Arab war would break out - our War of Independence and their Naqba. I believe that most of the 6000 young people who fell in the war on our side, as well as the thousands that were wounded – like you and me – were present at that moment in Dalia, seeing each other and singing together.
What state did we think of then? What state did we set out to create?
What has happened to the Hebrew society, the Hebrew culture, the Hebrew morality that we were so proud of then?
YES, WE did create a state. As the old song goes: “On the battlefield, a town is now standing”. We have brought millions of people to this country. From a Hebrew community of 650 thousand we have grown into a population of 7.5 million. A fourth and fifth generation speaks Hebrew as their mother tongue. Our economy is large and solid, even in these times of crisis. In several fields we are in the first rank of human endeavor.
But is this the society, is this the state, which we saw in our mind’s eye on the day it was set up? Is this the army that you and I swore allegiance to on the day it was founded?
Did we dream of this corrupt society, a society without compassion, where a handful of the very rich live off the fat of the land, with a large band of politicians and media people and other lackeys groveling in the dust at their feet?
Did we dream of a state that is an isolated and shunned ghetto in the region, lording it over an oppressed Palestinian ghetto-within-a-ghetto?
There were days when we could stand up anywhere in the world and proudly declare “I am an Israeli”. No one can do that now. The name of Israel has become mud. Since the Gaza War, in which our army poured molten lead onto men, women and children, many Israelis avoid speaking Hebrew in the streets of foreign cities and the IDF has ordered the faces of some of its officers – those whose rank equals yours – be obscured in pictures published in the media.
WHY DID this happen? When did this happen?
My aim is not to start a discussion with you about the fundamentals of Zionism, both positive and negative. We might not agree. Nor shall I enter into the question of whether everything really started in 1967, with the intoxicating and corruptive victory, or whether the seeds of disaster were sown earlier. On one thing I agree with you entirely: that the fatal step was taken then, on the morrow of that war, when we had the choice between the shining gold of peace and the base metal of annexation, and stretched our hands out towards the latter.
My personal conscience is clean. I am proud that I was one of the few in the country, and the sole voice in the Knesset, who proposed even during the war to turn over the occupied territories to the Palestinian people, so as to enable them to set up their state. This unique opportunity was missed, as you point out in your letter, because of the greed of the founders of the settlement movement, the champions of a Greater Israel.
From there things rolled on, as in a Greek tragedy, to where we are now, with an assorted crew of settlers, racists, nationalists, messianic zealots and ordinary fascists in charge of the state, turning the Knesset into a circus, undermining the Supreme Court, perverting the army, imposing obscurantist religious laws, handing the public treasury to unbridled tycoons, polluting the education system with a primitive nationalist indoctrination, persecuting poor asylum seekers, oppressing the national minority and planning military attacks that will wreak death and destruction on civilian populations.
This is the state that you detest. I have no quarrel with you about that.
This is the state that you despair of. About that I do have a dispute with you.
YOU BEAR the name of the prophet who is nearest to my heart, Yirmiyahu, the prophet of anger who called out: “Woe is me, my mother, that thou hast borne me a man of strife and a man of contention to the whole world … every one doth curse me!” (Jer. 15:10)
But Jeremiah was not only an accuser, he was also a healer: “to root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down – to build and to plant.” (Jer. 1:10)
You, Dov, have invested in this state much too much to turn your back on it in a gesture of anger and despair. The most hackneyed and worn-out slogan in Israel is also true: “We don’t have another state!”
Other states in the world have sunk to the depths of depravity and committed unspeakable crimes, far beyond our worst sins, and still brought themselves back to the family of nations and redeemed their souls.
We and all the members of our generation, who were among those who created this state, bear a heavy responsibility for it. A responsibility to our offspring, to those oppressed by this state, to the entire world. From this responsibility we cannot escape.
Even at your respectable age, and precisely because of it and because of what you represent, you must be a compass for the young and tell them: This state belongs to you, you can change it, don’t allow the nationalist wreckers to steal it from you!
True, 61 years ago we had another state in mind. Now, after our state has tumbled to where it is today, we must remember that other state, and remind everybody, every day, what the state should have been like, what it can be like, and not allow our vision to disappear like a dream. Let’s lend our shoulders to every effort to repair and heal!
You have voiced the message of Jeremiah, the prophet of anger. I beg you, give voice also to Jeremiah, the prophet of hope!


בשורת ירמיה
02/08/09לדב ירמיה, שלום!קיבלתי את המכתב המזעזע ששלחת לחוג מצומצם של ידידים. אתה מתאר את המציאות הישראלית בצבעים קודרים, אך נכונים, ומסיים בזריקת גט-כריתות למדינה.
"על כן אני... צבר בן 95, שחרש באדמת הארץ הזאת תלם, ונטע בה עץ, שבנה בה בית והוליד בה בנים ושילשים וריבעים ואף שפך עליה מדמו בקרב על הקמת המדינה,
"מצהיר בזה שאני מתכחש לאמונתי בציונות שהכזיבה, שלא אהיה עוד נאמן למדינה הפשיסטית היהודית ולחזונות-העוועים שלה, שאינני שר יותר את ההמנון הלאומני שלה, שאני ניצב בדום ובאבל רק ביום הזיכרון לנופלים במלחמות משני העמים, וצופה בלב נשבר על ישראל המאבדת את עצמה לדעת, ועל גורל שלושת דורות הצאצאים שהולדתי וגידלתי בה."
מאז שהיכרתי אותך, דב, לפני כחמישים שנה, אתה מצטייר בעיניי כמלח הארץ. אתה בן ההתיישבות העובדת, לוחם תש"ח ואלוף-משנה בצה"ל, אדם מצניע לכת, איש מוסר בכל רמ"ח אבריך.
במלחמת לבנון הראשונה חשפת את הזוועות שביצעו כמה מאנשינו באוכלוסיית הפליטים הפלסטיניים במרחב צור-צידון, והדו"ח האמיץ שלך זיעזע אותי לא פחות מטבח סברה ושתילה. כפי שעושים אנשי "שוברים שתיקה" כיום, לא חששת לשבור את השתיקה, אף שידעת שחבריך, קציני צה"ל, ינדו אותך.
אתה איש כלבבי, דוב. ולכן זיעזעו אותי דבריך באופן מיוחד.
נראה לי חשוב לחלוק את עיקרי דבריו של אדם בעל שעור-קומה כשלך עם האנשים שבינינו, שדמותה של המדינה מדיר שינה מעיניהם.
את מכתבך אתה פותח בדברים על מייסדי התנועה הציונית.
"אילו יכול היה הרצל לקום לתחייה ולראות למה הפכו המתיימרים בימינו לשאת את דגל הציונות המגשימה שהוא היה ראשון הוגיה ומחולליה, היה נמלט מיד, מוכה תדהמה ואומלל, חזרה למשכנו. כמוהו גם חיים וייצמן ורוב מגשימיה בפועל, החלוצים, אבות ואמהות דורי שלי. הם היו אנשי מצפון ומוסר, והיות האדם באשר הוא אדם הגון וישר היה בתודעתם מושכל ראשון."
את עיקר דברי-הקטרוג הלוהטים שלך אתה מקדיש ליחס המדינה לעם הפלסטיני. "וכך מקיימת ישראל מזה 42 שנה בפלסטין המיועדת מחנה-הסגר ענק, ומחזיקה בו תחת משטר צבאי מדכא ואכזרי עם שלם, במטרה אחת ויחידה, לנשלו מארצו ולרשת אותה ויהיה מה!!!
"את ניסיונות ההתקוממות שלו מדכא צה"ל בנפש חפצה, בסיוע פעיל של בריוני חיל-ההתנחלויות, באכזריות בנוסח אפרטהייד מתוחכם ומצור חונק, התעללות בלתי אנושית בחולים וביולדות, בהרס כלכלתו, ובגזל מיטב אדמותיו ומימיו.
"אך מעל כל אלה מתנוסס בזוועתו הדגל השחור של הזילות המחרידה בחיי האדם והדם הפלסטיני, והכרוניקה המספרית האיומה של חשבון הדמים שמנהל צה"ל עם הפלסטינים, ובמיוחד דמם של הילדים, במספרים מסמרי-שיער, לא תיסלח לישראל לעולם!"
אך נדמה לי שהייאוש התהומי, המתבטא בדבריך, יש לו שורשים נוספים. זוהי תחושה המקננת בלב רבים מבני דורך-דורי, ש"גנבו לנו את המדינה", שאין עוד שום דמיון בין המדינה שחלמנו עליה ולחמנו למענה לבין הדבר הזה שקם במקומה.
כשאני חושב על ימי נעורינו, שלך ושלי, עולה לנגד עיניי שוב ושוב תמונה מסוימת: כנס דליה, 1947.
על צלע ההר באמפיתיאטרון הטבעי במרומי הכרמל ישבו באותו לילה רבבות צעירים וצעירות. לכאורה זה היה כנס של ריקודי-עם, אך למעשה היה הרבה יותר מזה – חגיגה גדולה של התרבות העברית החדשה, שיצרנו אז בארץ, ושהמחולות העממיים מילאו בה תפקיד חשוב. הרקדנים והרקדניות היו ברובם חברי להקות הקיבוצים ותנועות-הנוער, והמחולות היו עבריים מקוריים, משולבים במחולות-עם רוסיים, פולניים, תימניים וחסידיים. הייתה שם גם קבוצה של צעירים ערביים, שרקדו דבקה באקסטאזה, רקדו, רקדו ורקדו.
באמצע האירוע הודיעו במערכת-הכרזה שבאו אלינו כמה מחברי ועדת-האו"ם, שנשלחה על-ידי הארגון הבינלאומי כדי להחליט על גורל הארץ. כשראינו אותם נכנסים לאמפיתיאטרון, קמו כל הרבבות על רגליהם ופרצו בשירה אדירה של "התקווה", שהידהדה מההרים.
לא ידענו שתוך חצי שנה תפרוץ המלחמה העברית-ערבית הגדולה, מלחמת-העצמאות שלנו ומלחמת-הנכבה שלהם. אני חושב שמרבית 6000 ההרוגים שלנו, שנפלו במלחמה זו, נכחו אז בדליה, ראו זה את זה ושרו ביחד, וכך גם האלפים שנפצעו בה, כמוך וכמוני.
על איזה מדינה חשבנו אז? איזו מדינה יצאנו להקים?
מה קרה לחברה העברית, לתרבות העברית, למוסר העברי שכל-כך התגאינו בהם?
כן, הקמנו מדינה. "על המשלט יושבת עיר". הבאנו מיליונים ארצה. מציבור עברי של 650 אלף נפש גדלנו לאוכלוסייה של 7.5 מיליון. דור רביעי וחמישי מדבר עברית כשפת-אמו. הכלכלה שלנו גדולה ואיתנה, גם בימי משבר. בתחומים שונים אנחנו נמצאים בשורה הראשונה של הישגי האנושות.
אבל האם זו החברה, וזו המדינה, שעמדה מול עינינו ביום הקמתה? האם זה הצבא שאתה ואני נשבענו לו אמונים ביום הקמתו?
האם חלמנו על החברה המושחתת הזאת, חסרת החמלה, שבה קומץ של עשירים מופלגים, פרות הבשן של ימינו, נהנים ממשמני הארץ, כשעדה גדולה של פוליטיקאים, אנשי תקשורת ושאר מלחכי-פנכה מתפלשים בעפרם?
האם חלמנו על מדינה שהיא גטו מנותק ומנודה מהמרחב הסובב אותה, והמחזיק בתוכו גטו פלסטיני עשוק ומדוכא, גטו בתוך גטו?
היו ימים, כאשר יכולנו לקום בכל מקום בעולם ולהכריז בגאווה "אני ישראלי!" איש מאיתנו אינו עושה זאת כיום, בשום מקום בעולם. שמה של ישראל דוחה ומשוקץ בעולם. מאז מלחמת-עזה, שבה שפך צבאנו עופרת רותחת על גברים, נשים וילדים, חוששים ישראלים רבים לדבר עברית בחוצות הערים בעולם, וצה"ל הורה לטשטש את פני קציניו – בעלי דרגה מקבילה לשלך – בתמונות המתפרסמות בתקשורת.
מדוע זה קרה? מתי זה קרה?
לא אכנס איתך לוויכוח על יסודות הציונות, החיוביים והשליליים. יתכן שלא נסכים בינינו. לא אכנס גם לשאלה האם באמת התחיל הכול ב-1967, באותו ניצחון משכר וממכר, או שזרע הפורענות נבט עוד קודם לכן. על דבר אחד אני מסכים איתך לגמרי: שהאסון הגדול התחיל אז, למחרת המלחמה, כאשר יכולנו לבחור בין הזהב של השלום ובין הגחלים הלוהטות של הסיפוח, ושלחנו את ידינו אל הגחלים.
מצפוני האישי נקי. אני גאה בזה שהייתי בין המעטים במדינה, והיחיד בכנסת, שהציע עוד במהלך המלחמה למסור מיד את השטחים הכבושים לעם הפלסטיני, כדי שיקים בהם את מדינתו. הזדמנות חד-פעמית זו הוחמצה, כדבריך, בגלל החמדנות של אבות המתנחלים, אנשי ארץ-ישראל-השלמה.
משם התגלגלו הדברים, כמו בטרגדיה יוונית, עד הלום, כאשר חבורה של מתנחלים, גזענים, לאומנים, דתיים-משיחיים וסתם פשיסטים השתלטו על המדינה, מקרקסים את הכנסת, מקעקעים את מערכת המשפט, משחיתים את צה"ל, כופים על המדינה חוקי-דת חשוכים, מוסרים את קופת הציבור לאילי-הון שלוחי-רסן, מזהמים את מערכת-החינוך בתכנים לאומניים פרימיטיביים, רודפים פליטים אומללים המחפשים אצלנו מקלט, מדכאים את המיעוט הלאומי, ומתכננים מבצעים צבאיים שיזרעו הרג והרס בקרב אוכלוסיות אזרחיות.
זוהי המדינה שאתה מתעב. על כך אין לי ויכוח איתך.
זוהי המדינה שאתה מתייאש ממנה. על כך יש ויש לי ויכוח איתך.
אתה נושא את שמו של הנביא הקרוב ביותר ללבי, נביא-הזעם שקרא: "אוי לי אימי כי ילידתיני, איש-ריב ואיש-מדון לכל הארץ...כולה מקללווני!" אבל ירמיהו לא בא רק לקטרג, אלא גם לרפא: "לנתוש ולנתוץ ולהאביד ולהרוס - לבנות ולנטוע."
אתה, דב, השקעת במדינה הזאת הרבה יותר מדי מכדי שתפנה לה עורף במחווה של זעם וייאוש. מפני שהמליצה הכי שחוקה והכי משומשת נכונה בכל זאת: "אין לנו מדינה אחרת!"
מדינות אחרות בעולם ירדו לשפל המדרגה וביצעו פשעים נוראים, הרבה מעבר לחטאינו הגרועים ביותר, ובכל זאת החזירו את עצמם למשפחת העמים והצילו את נפשם.
אנחנו וכל בני דורנו, שהיינו ממקימי המדינה הזאת, נושאים באחריות כבדה כלפיה. אחריות כלפי צאצאינו, אחריות כלפי מדוכאי המדינה הזאת, אחריות כלפי העולם כולו. מן האחריות הזאת איננו יכולים להשתחרר.
גם בגילך המכובד, ואולי דווקא בגללו ובגלל מה שאתה מייצג, אתה צריך לשמש מצפן לצעירים ולהבהיר להם: המדינה הזאת שייכת לכם, אתם יכולים לשנות אותה, אל תניחו למחריביה הלאומניים לגנוב אותה מכם!
נכון, לפני 61 שנה התכוונו למדינה שונה. עכשיו, אחרי שהידרדרה למקום שהיא נמצאת בו, צריך לזכור את המדינה האחרת ההיא ולהזכיר אותה, השכם והערב, כפי שהייתה צריכה להיות, כפי שהיא יכולה להיות, ולא להניח לה להימוג כחלום. ניתן כתף לכל מאמץ לתקן ולהבריא אותה!
השמעת את דבר ירמיהו, נביא-הזעם. אנא, השמע גם את דבר ירמיהו, נביא-תקווה!

Los papalotes de los niños de Gaza

Gracias a Carlos, Theo y Emma Beutel por el envío.

Los niños de Gaza intentan romper el récord Guinness de vuelo de cometas
La organización Guinness no pudo enviar a un juez por las restricciones para entrar en la franja

Miles de niños de Gaza intentaron romper ayer el récord Guinness de vuelo de cometas. Los observadores afirman que contaron hasta 3.000 cometas en el aire al mismo tiempo, cifra que supera a las 710 registrado en Alemania en 2008, pero el récord no pudo ser verificado por un juez del Libro Guinness de los Récords debido a las restricciones para entrar en la franja.
Las cometas, de fabricación casera, fueron lanzadas al aire por unos 6.000 niños de los 119 colegios de Gaza en la playa de Beit Lahiya, componiendo un cuadro de color inusual en un territorio desolado, en el que entre enero y febrero murieron más de 1.400 personas por una ofensiva militar israelí. John Ging, responsable de la UNRWA, agencia de la ONU para los refugiados palestinos, describió la iniciativa como "una expresión de las demandas de libertad de los niños".

Noticia tomada de: http://www.elpais.com/articulo/internacional/ninos/Gaza/intentan/romper/record/Guinness/vuelo/cometas/elpepuint/20090731elpepuint_13/Tes

Ciclo de cine - a partir de este martes 4 de agosto

Que decidan los pueblos (Sari Nusseibeh)

http://dissentmagazine.org/online.php?id=259

Rumbo a la primera película del ciclo de cine "¿Paz o pax en Medio Oriente?"

Además de la entrada "Punto de encuentro" publicada el 13 de enero en este blog, aquí se puede encontrar más información sobre la ONG "Just Vision" empeñada en dar a conocer numerosos puntos de encuentro entre ambas partes del conflicto.
http://www.justvision.org/en/about

Ciclo de cine "¿Paz o Pax en Medio Oriente?" - a partir del 4 de agosto

Errata: en la última mesa de debate,del 29 de septiembre, sobre la película Vals con Bashir, participará Rafael Barajas (El Fisgón) en lugar de Lorenzo Meyer.

Uri Avnery sobre crímenes de guerra y los soldados que se resisten a perpetrarlos

Gracias a Eduardo Mosches por el envío.

Uri Avnery18.07.09

The Johnny Procedure

LIKE THE ghost of Hamlet’s father, the evil spirit of the Gaza War refuses to leave us in peace. This week it came back to disturb the tranquility of the chiefs of the state and the army.

“Breaking the Silence”, a group of courageous former combat soldiers, published a report comprising the testimonies of 30 Gaza War fighters. A hard-hitting report about actions that may be considered war crimes.

The generals went automatically into denial mode. Why don’t the soldiers disclose their identity, they asked innocently. Why do they obscure their faces in the video testimonies? Why do they hide their names and units?

How can we be sure that they are not actors reading a text prepared for them by the enemies of Israel? How do we know that this organization is not manipulated by foreigners, who finance their actions? And anyhow, how do we know that they are not lying out of spite?

One can answer with a Hebrew adage: “It has the feel of Truth”. Anyone who has ever been a combat soldier in war, whatever war, recognizes at once the truth in these reports. Each of them has met a soldier who is not ready to return home without an X on his gun showing that he killed at least one enemy. (One such person appears in my book “The Other Side of the Coin”, which was written 60 years ago and published in English last year as the second part of “1948: A soldier’s Tale”.) We have been there.

The testimonies about the use of phosphorus, about massive bombardment of buildings, about “the neighbor procedure” (using civilians as human shields), about killing “everything that moves”, about the use of all methods to avoid casualties on our side – all these corroborate earlier testimonies about the Gaza War, there can be no reasonable doubt about their authenticity. I learned from the report that the “neighbor procedure” is now called “Johnny procedure”, God knows why Johnny and not Ahmad.

The height of hypocrisy is reached by the generals with their demand that the soldiers come forward and lodge their complaints with their commanders, so that the army can investigate them through the proper channels.

First of all, we have already seen the farce of the army investigating itself.

Second, and this is the main point: only a person intent on becoming a martyr would do so. A solder in a combat unit is a part of a tightly knit group whose highest principle is loyalty to comrades and whose commandment is “Thou shalt not squeal!” If he discloses questionable acts he has witnessed, he will be considered a traitor and ostracized. His life will become hell. He knows that all his superiors, from squad leader right up to division commander, will persecute him.

This call to go through “official channels” is a vile method of the generals – members of the General Staff, Army Spokesmen, Army Lawyers – to divert the discussion from the accusations themselves to the identity of the witnesses. No less despicable are the tin soldiers called “military correspondents”, who collaborate with them.


BUT BEFORE accusing the soldiers who committed the acts described in the testimonies, one has to ask whether the decision to start the war did not itself lead inevitably to the crimes.

Professor Assa Kasher, the father of the army “Code of Ethics” and one of the most ardent supporters of the Gaza War, asserted in an essay on this subject that a state has the right to go to war only in self defense, and only if the war constitutes “a last resort”. “All alternative courses” to attain the rightful aim “must have been exhausted”.

The official cause of the war was the launching from the Gaza Strip of rockets against Southern Israeli towns and villages. It goes without saying that it is the duty of the state to defend its citizens against missiles. But had all the means to achieve this aim without war really been exhausted? Kasher answers with a resounding “yes”. His key argument is that “there is no justification for demanding that Israel negotiate directly with a terrorist organization that does not recognize it and denies its very right to exist.”

This does not pass the test of logic. The aim of the negotiations was not supposed to be the recognition by Hamas of the State of Israel and its right to exist (who needs this anyway?) but getting them to stop launching missiles at Israeli citizens. In such negotiations, the other side would understandably have demanded the lifting of the blockade against the population of the Gaza Strip and the opening of the supply passages. It is reasonable to assume that it was possible to reach – with Egyptian help - an agreement that would also have included the exchange of prisoners.

No only was this course not exhausted – it was not even tried. The Israeli government has consistently refused to negotiate with a “terrorist organization” and even with the Palestinian Unity Government that was in existence for some time and in which Hamas was represented.

Therefore, the decision to start the War on Gaza, with a civilian population of a million and a half, was unjustified even according to the criteria of Kasher himself. “All the alternative courses” had not been exhausted, or even attempted.

But we all know that, apart from the official reason, there was also an unofficial one: to topple the Hamas government in the Gaza Strip. In the course of the war, official spokesmen stated that there was a need to attach a “price tag” – in other words, to cause death and destruction not in order to hurt the “terrorists” themselves (which would have been almost impossible) but to turn the life of the civilian population into hell, so they would rise up and overthrow Hamas.

The immorality of this strategy is matched by its inefficacy: our own experience has taught us that such methods only serve to harden the resolve of the population and unite them around their courageous leadership.


WAS IT at all possible to conduct this war without committing war crimes? When a government decides to hurl its regular armed forces at a guerrilla organization, which by its very nature fights from within the civilian population, it is perfectly clear that terrible suffering will be caused to that population. The argument that the harm caused to the population, and the killing of over a thousand men, women and children was inevitable should, by itself, have led to the conclusion that the decision to start this was a terrible act right from the beginning.

The Defense Establishment takes the easy way out. The ministers and generals simply assert that they do not believe the Palestinian and international reports about the death and destruction, stating that they are, again in Kasher’s words, “mistaken and false”. Just to be sure, they decided to boycott the UN commission that is currently investigating the war, headed by a respected South African judge who is both a Jew and a Zionist.

Assa Kasher is adopting a similar attitude when he says: “Somebody who does not know all the details of an action cannot assess it in a serious, professional and responsible way, and therefore should not do so, in spite of all emotional or political temptations.” He demands that we wait until the Israeli army completes its investigations, before we even discuss the matter.

Really? Every organization that investigates itself lacks credibility, not to mention a hierarchical body like the army. Moreover, the army does not – and cannot – obtain testimony from the main eye-witnesses: the inhabitants of Gaza. An investigation based only on the testimony of the perpetrators, but not of the victims, is ridiculous. Now even the testimonies of the soldiers of Breaking the Silence are discounted, because they cannot disclose their identity.


IN A war between a mighty army, equipped with the most sophisticated weaponry in the world, and a guerrilla organization, some basic ethical questions arise. How should the soldiers behave when faced with a structure in which there are not only enemy fighters, which they are “allowed” to hit, but also unarmed civilians, which they are “forbidden” to hit?

Kasher cites several such situations. For example: a building in which there are both “terrorists” and non-fighters. Should it be hit by aircraft or artillery fire that will kill everybody, or should soldiers be sent in who will risk their lives and kill only the fighters? His answer: there is no justification for the risking of the lives of our soldiers in order to save the lives of enemy civilians. An aerial or artillery attack must be preferred.

That does not answer the question about the use of the Air Force to destroy hundreds of houses far enough from our soldiers that there was no danger emanating from them, nor about the killing of scores of recruits of the Palestinian civilian police on parade, nor about the killing of UN personnel in food supply convoys. Nor about the illegal use of white phosphorus against civilians, as described in the soldiers’ testimonies gathered by Breaking the Silence, and the use of depleted uranium and other carcinogenic substances.

The entire country experienced on live TV how a shell hit the apartment of a doctor and wiped out almost all of his family. According to the testimony of Palestinian civilians and international observers, many such incidents took place.

The Israeli army took great pride in its method of warning the inhabitants by means of leaflets, phone calls and such, so as to induce them to flee. But everyone – and first of all the warners themselves - knew that the civilians had nowhere secure to escape to and that there were no clear and safe escape routes. Indeed, many civilians were shot while trying to flee.


WE SHALL not evade the hardest moral question of all: is it permissible to risk the lives of our soldiers in order to save the old people, women and children of the “enemy”? The answer of Assa Kasher, the ideologue of the “Most Moral Army in the World”, is unequivocal: it is absolutely forbidden to risk the lives of the soldiers. The most telling sentence in his entire essay is: “Therefore…the state must give preference to the lives of its soldiers above the lives of the (unarmed) neighbors of a terrorist.”

These words should be read twice and three times, in order to grasp their full implications. What is actually being said here is: if necessary to avoid casualties among our soldiers, it is better to kill enemy civilians without any limit.

In retrospect, one can only be glad that the British soldiers, who fought against the Irgun and the Stern Group, did not have an ethical guide like Kasher.

This is the principle that guided the Israeli army in the Gaza War, and, as far as I know, this is a new doctrine: in order to avoid the loss of one single soldier of ours, it is permissible to kill 10, 100 and even 1000 enemy civilians. War without casualties on our side. The numerical result bears witness: more than 1000 people killed in Gaza, a third or two thirds of them (depending on who you ask) civilians, women and children, as against 6 (six) Israeli soldiers killed by enemy fire. (Four more were killed by “friendly” fire.)

Kasher states explicitly that it is justified to kill a Palestinian child who is in the company of a hundred “terrorists”, because the “terrorists” might kill children in Sderot. But in reality, it was a case of killing a hundred children who were in the company of one “terrorist”.

If we strip this doctrine of all ornaments, what remains is a simple principle: the state must protect the lives of its soldiers at any price, without any limit or law. A war of zero casualties. That leads necessarily to a tactic of killing every person and destroying every building that could represent a danger to the soldiers, creating an empty space in front of the advancing troops.

Only one conclusion can be drawn from this: from now on, any Israeli decision to start a war in a built-up area is a war crime, and the soldiers who rise up against this crime should be honored. May they be blessed.

אורי אבנרי נוהל ג'וניכמו רוח אביו של האמלט, הרוח הרעה של מלחמת-עזה מסרבת לתת לנו מנוח. השבוע היא חזרה להטריד את ראשי המדינה וצה"ל...
קראו עוד במצורף
http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/he/channels/avnery/1247930959

Contra el sitio por sed en Cisjordania - protesta

Gracias a Eduardo Mosches por el envío

Israel leaves the inhabitants of the West bank thirsty
Join us in a protest against the water shortages caused by the occupation

Dry water taps – no water for drinking or bathing, many months during the summer heat. Since March this is the situation of many families in the villages Qarawat Bani Zayed, Kufr 'Ein, Ramani & Nabi Salah, 15,000 people. In the same time, these Palestinian villagers can see beyond the settlements' fences a different situation. They see green lawns and sprinklers irrigating the whole day. A similar situation exsists in many other parts of the West Bank.

We hereby call activists to join and donate money to the protest campaign
Checques can be made to Rabbis For Human Rights,
9 Harechavim St. Jerusalem, 93462, Israel.
Or to account No.153380 in Bank Hapoalim branch 782, Aza, Jerusalem.
N.B.: Mention for water campaign

In a later announcement we shall give details about the water convoy to Qarawat Bani Zayed that will take place on 07/08/09

Further activities will consist of demonstrations, petitions, letters, appeals to MKs, embassies and intl. organizations.

Details and comments: Yuval 050-7336117, Yakov 050-5733276, 09-7670801 email manor12@zahav.net.il

Background: Since the occupation in 1967, Israel took control over most of the water sources in the West Bank, and uses them for Israeli clients and especially for settlers. The mountain acquifer is considered a joint (Palestinian-Israeli) water reservoir that Israel is permitted to use – but not in the current way when 80% of the water is taken by Israel and the remaining 20% are allocated to the millions of Palestinian inhabitants. Other water sources, as in the Jordan valley, are used almost exclusively by Israelis and only meager quantities are left for the usage of Palestinians. The Palestinian inhabitants of the south Hebron area having a serious problem of water shortage as well. In Israel and the settlements, the mean per capita water consumption for domestic and municipal usage is 235 lites per day, and in the occupied territories it is 66 litres per day only. 227,500 people in 220 villages are not connected to the water system. An additional 190,000 people have only partial water supply.

The Oslo accords reaffirmed the Israeli control over the water supply and pumping. The Palestinians assumed that it was a temporary agreement, and according to the time table that was established then, by May 1999 an independent Palestinian state would be established with control over its natural resources. The continuing water shortage increases the anger and frustration the Palestinians feel.

The small quantity of water supplied to the Palestinians is not distributed equally. As the water runs through the pipes the quantity reduces and as a home is situated higher up the pressure diminishes, and as a result the highest situated homes do not receive supply at all.

The village Qarawat Bani Zayed, situated on a mountain slope, is an example to this difficult situation. Lately Israeli peace activists visited this village and heard of this difficult situation. Many inhabitants of this village have to purchase water from water tanks at high prices – up to NIS 40 to 1 cubic metre of water, ten times its price in Israel or the settlements. Abud spring that gave them water before the occupation was caught by Mekorot, the Israeli water supply company, and only a small portion of its water currently arrives at the village.

Supplying enough water to the Palestinian civilians – for their homes, public and agricultural needs is not a favour or act of compassion. This is a legal and moral obligation whose violation is a serious crime against international law.

Organisations participating: Anarchists against the fence, Bat Shalom, Gush Shalom, The Israeli Committee Against Home Demolitions, The Israeli Committee Against Torture, The Alternative Information Centre, Yesh Gvul, Sadaqa-Reut, Coalition of Women for Peace, Physicians for Human Rights.


מדינת ישראל מצמיאה את תושבי הגדה המערבית
בואו להשתתף במחאה על מצוקת המים

פותחים את הברז ואין מים – לא לרחצה וגם לא לשתיה, לא יום, לא יומיים אלא חודשים רבים בחום הקיץ. מאז חודש מרס השנה זהו מצבן של משפחות רבות בכפר קרוואת בניי זייד ושכניו כופור עין, רמאני, ונאבי סלאח, בסך הכל כ- 15,000 נפש. בו בזמן, יכולים תושבי הכפרים לראות מעבר לגדרות ההתנחלויות הסמוכות דשאים ירוקים וממטרות מסתובבות כל היום. מצב דומה קיים בחלקים רבים של הגדה המערבית.
אנו קוראים לפעילות ולפעילים להשתתף ולתרום למסע המחאה
המחאות ניתן לשלוח לפקודת "מטה הקואליציה" ת.ד. 1335, כפר-סבא, 44113
או לחשבון מס. 119442 בבנק הפועלים סנף 679- טשרניחובסקי, כ"ס

בהודעה הבאה נפרסם פרטים לגבי שיירת מים לקרוואת המתוכננת ל- 7.8.09
פעילויות מתוכננות נוספות: הפגנות מחאה, עצומה, מכתבים, פניות לחכ"ים, לשגרירויות ולארגונים בי"ל

לפרטים ותגובות: יובל- 050-7336117. יעקב- 050-5733276, 09-7670801. במייל: manor12@zahav.net.il

רקע: מאז הכיבוש ב- 67 ישראל השתלטה על רוב מקורות המים בגדה המערבית, המנוצלים לטובת ישראלים בכלל ומתנחלים במיוחד. אקוויפר ההר ממנו מופקים מדי שנה 600 מיליון ממ"ק, נחשב כ"מאגר משותף" שישראל רשאית להשתמש בחלק ממנו – אך בודאי לא בחלוקה הקיימת היום, כאשר 80% מן המים נלקחים לשימוש ישראלי ואילו למיליוני התושבים הפלסטינים מוקצית "מכסה" של 20% בלבד. מאגרי מים אחרים, כגון בבקעת הירדן, מוקדשים ברובם לשימוש ישראלי ולפלסטינים נותרות כמויות מועטות בלבד. גם לפלסטינים בהר חברון, ובמיוחד בדרומו, יש בעיה קשה במיוחד של מחסור במים. הצריכה הממוצעת לנפש לצרכים ביתיים ועירוניים עומדת בישראל ובהתנחלויות על 235 ליטר ליום, ובפלסטין על 66 ליטר בלבד. 227,500 נפשות ב- 220 כפרים אינם מחוברות כלל לרשת המים. 190,000 נוספים זוכים לרשת מים מצומצמת וחלקית.

הסכמי אוסלו הנציחו את השליטה הישראלית על מקורות ושאיבת המים. הפלסטינים הניחו אז כי מדובר בהסכם ביניים זמני וכי לפי לוח הזמנים שנקבע תקום עד מאי 1999 מדינה פלסטינית בעלת שליטה על המשאבים הטבעיים. המשך המחסור החמור במים מגביר את תחושת המרירות והזעם בקרב הפלסטינים.

מעט המים שמועברים לפלסטינים אינם מחולקים בצורה שוויונית. ככל שהמים עוברים מרחק גדול יותר בצינורות כך פוחתת הכמות המגיעה ליעד הסופי, ככל שהבית נמצא גבוה יותר כך פוחת לחץ המים בצינורות, ולבתים הגבוהים ביותר אין מים בכלל.

הכפר קרוואת בני זייד, הבנוי על צלע הר, הוא דוגמא בולטת למצב הקשה. לאחרונה ביקרו בכפר זה פעילי שלום ישראלים ושמעו בפירוט על המצוקה הקשה. תושבים רבים שלביתם לא מגיעים מים זורמים נאלצים לרכוש מים ממיכליות במחירים מופקעים – עד 40 שקלים לממ"ק מים, פי עשרה ממחירו בישראל או בהתנחלויות. יש משפחות המוציאות עד מחצית ההכנסה החודשית על מים. מעין עבוד, שלפני הכיבוש סיפק את צרכיהם של תושבי הכפר, נמצא בשליטת "מקורות" ורק חלק קטן ממימיו מגיע אליהם.
אספקת מים בכמות מספקת לאזרחים הפלסטינים - לצרכים ביתיים, ציבוריים וחקלאיים – אינה "טובה" או "חסד". זוהי חובה חוקית ומוסרית, והפרתה היא עבירה חמורה על החוק הבינלאומי.

הארגונים השותפים למסע המחאה: אנרכיסטים נגד הגדר, בת שלום, גוש שלום, הוועד הישראלי נגד הריסת בתים, הוועד הישראלי נגד עינויים, המרכז לאינפורמציה אלטרנטיבית, יש גבול, סדקה-רעות, קואליציית נשים לשלום, רופאים למען זכויות אדם,

"No había inocentes"

"Abrimos fuego y no hacemos preguntas". "Nos dijeron que debíamos arrasar la mayor parte posible de nuestra zona". "Mi comandante me dijo, medio sonriendo, medio serio, que esas demoliciones podrían añadirse a su lista de crímenes de guerra". "Si alguna vez nos hablaron de inocentes, fue para decirnos que no había inocentes". Es el turno de los soldados israelíes. Dirigentes, académicos y analistas hebreos; políticos y civiles palestinos; organizaciones no gubernamentales internacionales y locales; Naciones Unidas. Todos han investigado y extraído conclusiones de la guerra que el Ejército israelí lanzó contra Gaza el invierno pasado. ¿Guerra? "¿Es realmente plausible denominar batallas al bombardeo con artillería y tanques, y al fuego lanzado desde helicópteros y aviones?", se pregunta el abogado Michael Sfard, defensor ante los tribunales israelíes de muchas víctimas palestinas del Ejército. "Es el ataque más duro que ha infligido el Estado de Israel a una zona urbana densamente poblada por civiles", añade Sfard. Más información

Armas de precisión contra civiles de Gaza: AI

MADRID, 1 (OTR/PRESS).- Amnistía Internacional (AI) ha asegurado que la "mayoría" de los 1.400 palestinos que murieron durante la ofensiva efectuada a principios de este año por Israel en la Franja de Gaza, entre los que había alrededor de "300 niños y niñas y centenares de civiles desarmados", fueron víctimas de "armas de alta precisión" cuyo "excelente sistema óptico permitía ver con detalle el objetivo", por lo que no se pueden seguir justificando estas muertes "calificándolas sin más de "daños colaterales"". Más información.

Noticias de Gush Shalom y una nota de Uri Avnery

Gracias a Eduardo Mosches por el envío.

Gush Shalom, English website http://zope.gush-shalom.org/index_en.html
Статьи Ури Авнери http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/ru/avnery
http://zope.gush-shalom.org/index_he.html גוש שלום, אתר בעברית
http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/ar/avnery اوري افنيريTruth / Правда / אמת / حقيقة

FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE FENCE
http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/events/1247062614
משני עברי הגדר
http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/he/events/1247062614

Palestinian villages surrounded by the green lawns of settlements get hardly a drop of water
Gush Shalom takes part in a campaign to raise this subject by bringing water to the hardest hit. You can take part wherever you are - with an earmarked donation
http://gush-shalom.org. toibillboard.info/water.htm


New on Forum Gush Shalom
'Ana Atlab el Haq - an in-depth article on what is going on in the Sheikh Jarrah Jerusalem neighborhoodby Marcey Gayer
http://www.kibush.co.il/show_file.asp?num=34387
What YOU can do
http://www.kibush.co.il/show_file.asp?num=34388


Ad in Haaretz, July 10, 2009
From the mouth of the ministerLieberman admitted franklyI live in a settlement.Therefore I cannotNegotiate with the USThe settlements are... Full text
http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/weekly_ad/1247217313


~~~


URI AVNERY
Matter of the Heart
EVERY GERMAN child knows the story of the Captain of Koepenick

The scene is 1908 Germany, with the Second Reich at the peak of its power, ruled by a Kaiser who is almost always decked out in a splendid military uniform

Full English text in the end

Avnery columns' archive http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/avnery
~~~













כפרים פלסטיניים מוקפים במדשאות הירוקות של ההתנחלויות בקושי מקבלים טיפת מים גוש שלום משתתף במסע ציבורי לעורר מודעות לנושא הזה על ידי הבאת מים לנפגעים הקשים ביותר. את/ה יכול/ה להשתתף במאבק הזה, מכל מקום – על ידי מתן תרומה. http://gush-shalom.org.toibillboard.info/water.htm


חדש בפורום גוש שלום
הבאמת יש הבדל?עידו סילוורשטיין מגיב על מאמרו של אורי אבנרי
http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/he/channels/archive/1246797845

מודעה ב"הארץ"10 ביולי 2009
מפי השרליברמן הצהיר בגילוי-לב:"אני גר בהתנחלות, ולכןאיני יכול לנהלמו"מ עם האמריקאים".ההתנחלויות במהותן מהוותהפרה של...
קראו עוד:
httphttp://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/he/channels/weekly_ad/1247217723

~~~
אורי אבנרי
עניינים שבלב

כל ילד גרמני מכיר את הסיפור על הסרן מקופניק.
זה אירע ב-1906, כאשר "הרייך השני" היה בשיאו, ובראשו עמד הקיסר שלבש מדי-צבא מפוארים.
סנדלר בשם וילהלם פויגט ... קראו עוד במצורף


ארכיון מאמרים של אורי אבנרי
http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/he/channels/avnery

~~~~~





Uri Avnery11.07.09

Matter of the Heart

EVERY GERMAN child knows the story of the Captain of Koepenick.

The scene is 1908 Germany, with the Second Reich at the peak of its power, ruled by a Kaiser who is almost always decked out in a splendid military uniform.

A shoemaker named Wilhelm Voigt is released from prison, after doing time for fraud. He needs a passport to get a job, but felons cannot obtain a passport.

The shoemaker goes to a masquerade shop and puts on the uniform of an army captain. He commandeers a squad of soldiers that happens to be passing in the street. They do notice some irregularities in his outfit but dare not disobey an officer.

The “captain” marches the soldiers to the little town of Koepenick, a suburb of Berlin, arrests the mayor and confiscates the safe, which contains blank passports. Later the police have no great difficulty making out who committed the outrage, and it is not long before he is arrested.

When an adjutant announces the news to the Kaiser, the court holds its breath. After a tense moment or two, His Majesty bursts out laughing. All of Germany laughs with him, along with the rest of Europe.

The “Hauptmann von Koepenick” became a legend, because his adventure threw into relief the very essence of the regime: in the militarist Germany of the time, just before World War I, military rank meant unquestioned authority.


PERHAPS IT is true that every country has an episode of this kind, highlighting with one stroke the main foibles of its regime. In Israel it was – until this week – the affair of the “Ramat Gan Light Bulb”.

In March 1982 the Economy Minister Yaacov Meridor, a leading member of the Likud, announced that a scientist by the name of Danny Berman had come up with an invention that would cause a revolution throughout the world. By a simple chemical process he was able to produce energy sufficient to light all of Ramat Gan with one single light bulb. Ramat Gan is a sister town of Tel Aviv, and almost as big.

Yaacov Meridor (no relation of the current minister Dan Meridor) was not just anybody. He had been the commander of the Irgun before the arrival of Menachem Begin, and later had set up major economic enterprises in Africa. He was the No. 2 Likud leader and it was no secret that Begin considered him his heir and successor.

Before Meridor’s announcement, a senior reporter of my news magazine, Haolam Hazeh, came to me and told me breathlessly about the wondrous invention. I responded with one word: Nonsense. My years as an investigative magazine editor had honed my nose for detecting phony stories. But the whole country was ecstatic.

In the following days, the revolutionary invention was exposed as a simple fraud. Berman, the genius who posed as a former Air Force officer, was exposed as an impostor with a criminal record. Meridor lost his political future. But a small band of True Believers, including my senior reporter, continued to swear that Berman was indeed a misunderstood genius.

How could a completely nonsensical story, without any foundation at all, capture a whole country and elicit general acceptance, at least at the beginning? Very simple: it expressed one of the deeply-held beliefs of the Israeli public - that Jews are the most intelligent people in the world.

That, by the way, is a conviction held both by many Jews and by anti-Semites. The infamous tract “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion”, which discloses a Jewish conspiracy to take over the world, relies on this belief.

There are many theories which profess to explain the alleged superiority of the “Jewish Brain”. One asserts that in the thousands of years of persecution, the Jews were compelled to develop their brainpower just in order to survive. Another theory goes like this: in medieval Catholic Europe, the most intelligent men became priests or monks whose vocational celibacy prevented the transmission of their genes to offspring, while it was the habit in the Jewish communities for rich parents to marry their daughters to the most outstanding young scholars.


THIS WEEK, the Ramat Gan Light Bulb was trumped by an even more magnificent invention: the Heart Sticker.

The economic supplement of Haaretz published a sensational scoop: a virtually unknown Israeli company had sold a third of its shares to a Taiwan-British corporation for 370 million dollars, raising its own value to a billion. All this owing to a revolutionary invention: a small sticker that, when put on the breast, can foretell a heart attack a crucial half hour before it actually happens. The sticker sends out warnings by cellular phone and satellite, thus introducing the possibility of saving countless lives.

That evening, one of the chiefs of the happy firm appeared on TV and disclosed that the wonder-sticker could do much more: for example, it could measure the amount of sugar in the blood without invading the body.

My nose immediately began to twitch.

And indeed, a day later the media started to investigate the matter, revealing one curious fact after another. Nobody had actually seen the wonder sticker. No patent had been registered. No cardiologist or other expert had examined it. No scientific paper had mentioned it. And, it seems, no scientific experiment had been conducted.

The Taiwan-British company had sent no representative to Israel to examine the invention for which it had allegedly paid a huge sum. The negotiations had been conducted entirely by email, without any personal contact. The lawyers involved refused to show the signed agreement.

When reporters contacted the foreign company, they denied any knowledge of the matter. It appeared that the inventor had registered a computer domain with a similar name and thus actually sold the shares to himself.

At this stage, the house of cards started to fall apart. It was revealed that the inventor had twice done time in prison for fraud. But his partners still insisted that the matter was serious and that within days, if not hours, the genius of the invention would be revealed to all, and the critics would be compelled to eat their hats.

The hats remained uneaten, and the partners deserted the ship one after the other.


WHAT TRANSFORMED the affair from an amusing “sting” operation into a matter of national importance was the readiness of the whole country, for a whole day, to accept the story as another proof of Jewish genius.

No less typical was the identity of its heroes. No. 1 was the inventor himself, who continues to protest that this time, this of all times, he is not an impostor. No. 2 was his partner, the businessman, who was or was not an accomplice to the fraud. But the interesting characters are the other two main protagonists.

No. 3 has been for many years the closest friend of Binyamin Netanyahu, and especially of his wife, Sarah (known to everybody by the childish diminutive Sara’le). At the height of the scandal he resigned his job as CEO, after failing to obtain a copy of the famous contract. If it is assumed that this friend of Netanyahu’s is indeed innocent, his level of intelligence must be subject to grave doubts. However, it may not be intelligence that the Netanyahu family looks for in close friends.

That is even more true for No. 4: Haggai Hadas. The exact nature of his involvement is not entirely clear. At the beginning, he vigorously defended the invention and seemed to be involved from head to foot, but when the thing blew up he desperately tried to distance himself from it.

Why is this any more important than the usual gossip? Because Haggai Hadas, apart from enjoying Netanyahu’s confidence and being, reportedly, a personal friend of his wife, has served in the past as chief of the operations department of the Mossad, the third most important post in the spy agency. He could by now have been the Mossad chief, if the incumbent had not actively prevented everybody else from coming even close.

Some weeks ago, Netanyahu appointed Hadas to one of the most sensitive positions in the security establishment: to coordinate all the efforts to free the “kidnapped” soldier Gilad Shalit.

If we do not want to assume that this man, a confidante of the Prime Minister and a former senior officer of the Mossad, who has been responsible for life-and-death decisions, was an accomplice to a vile fraud, there is no escape from the conclusion that his judgment is grievously impaired and that he fell into a trap that any person with common sense could have spotted a mile off.

How can such a person possibly be entrusted with such a sensitive task as the negotiation for a prisoner exchange with Hamas, in which sophisticated Egyptian mediators are involved?

And what does this say about the judgment of Netanyahu, who appointed him to this task, especially assuming that his wife had demanded it?


THIS WEEK also marked a milestone: the end of the first 100 days of Netanyahu’s second term as Prime Minister.

The Kadima people have invented a catchy slogan: “100 days, 0 achievements”.

To start with, Netanyahu appointed a bloated government in which a third of all Knesset members serve as ministers or deputy ministers, many of them without any apparent duties. Two of the three most important ministries were allotted to totally unsuited persons: the Treasury to an economic toddler and the Foreign Office to a racist who is openly shunned by many of the world’s most prominent leaders.

Then there came a series of laws and measures that were announced with great fanfare, only to be dropped very quietly. The latest example: the levying of VAT on fruits and vegetables, which was abandoned at the last moment.

But the epitome of inefficiency was the inability to put together the Prime Minister’s staff. The Advisor for National Security, Uzi Arad, is not interested in peace with either the Palestinians or the Syrians, and wants to deal only with the Iranian issue. (This week President Barack Obama issued a public and unequivocal prohibition on any Israeli military attack on Iran.) The Chief of Cabinet, the Director General of the Prime Minister’s office, the Political Advisor and other members of the staff detest each other and do not make any effort to hide it. The Press Advisor has already been replaced, and this week a female friend of Sarah Netanyahu was appointed as advisor for “Branding the State” (Anyone know what that means??)

In the meantime, Sara’le has returned to the spotlight. A former airline stewardess who met Netanyahu in an airport duty-free shop when he was still married to his second wife, she was universally disliked and served as a butt of jokes during her husband’s first term. This time, efforts were made to keep her in the background. When the Prime Minister still insisted on taking her with him to Washington, Michelle Obama avoided meeting her. When he was due to visit several European capitals, she was struck from the list at the last moment. But it seems that she is very active behind the scenes, especially as far as crucial senior appointments are concerned.

Perhaps this country really does need a wonder sticker?
permlink: http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/avnery/1246739493

data & Daily updated occupation related reading
http://www.kibush.co.il
http://www.btselem.org
http://www.ochaopt.org

If instead of daily looking at websites you prefer to receive a weekly selection by email
subscribe to TOI-Billboard
TOI-Billboard has moved to a new liststerver,
(re)subscribe by writing in the subject line
"Send me TOI" to: mhtml:%7BAFAE16F9-BE05-4577-8087-8D08CA43582C%7Dmid://00000009/!x-usc:mailto:otherisr@actcom.co.il
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Most recent TOI-Billboard can be seen at:
http://toibillboard.info/index.htm

The Other Israel May issue http://toibillboard.info/141content.htm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Gush Shalom email address for correspondence, also if you want to (un)subscribe
correspondence @ gush - shalom . org
(without the spaces!)
Address for contributions:
GUSH SHALOM p.o.b. 3322 Tel Aviv 61033
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
www.gush-shalom.org

Los niños de Sonora

La iniciativa Adopta a un niño muerto se hace eco de las exigencias contra la impunidad en el caso de los niños de la guardería ABC en Sonora. Invitamos a quienes lo deseen a firmar y enviar el mensaje a la dirección que sigue. Se reproduce el mensaje recibido por internet (se incluye la invitación a la marcha que tuvo lugar el sábado pasado):

Este documento recoge exigencias básicas a los tres poderes del gobierno mexicano en relación al descuido y la corrupción criminales que provocaron la tragedia de la guardería ABC. Si estás de acuerdo, por favor fírmalo y reenvíalo a tus amigos y conocidos. En caso de que te toque el número 100 o un múltiplo de 100, por favor envía la lista a: contralaimpunidad100@yahoo.com y continúa la circulación a tu red de contactos.

Dirigido a:

-SUPREMA CORTE DE JUSTICIA
-GOBIERNO DEL ESTADO DE SONORA
-PROCURADURÍAS GENERAL DE LA REPÚBLICA Y DEL ESTADO DE SONORA y DE LOS ESTADOS DE LA REPÚBLICA
-INSTITUTO MEXICANO DEL SEGURO SOCIAL
-SECRETARÍA DE DESARROLLO SOCIAL
-COMISIÓN NACIONAL DE DERECHOS HUMANOS
-UNICEF
-ORGANIZACIÓN INTERNACIONAL DEL TRABAJO
-CORTE INTERAMERICANA DE DERECHOS HUMANOS
Ciudadanos y ciudadanas, sin partido político y sin otro interés que luchar contra la impunidad y acompañar a los familiares de las pequeñas víctimas del incendio en la Guardería ABC de Hermosillo, Sonora, nos adherimos a la siguiente demanda.

Exigimos:
-Más guarderías dignas y seguras.
-Se declare inconstitucional la subrogación en este delicado campo de la seguridad social.
-Respeto al derecho de las madres y los padres trabajadores de contar con un servicio de guardería que proteja la vida y propicie el desarrollo integral de los infantes.
-Cárcel para los culpables e inhabilitación vitalicia para los funcionarios responsables del incendio en la guardería ABC de Hermosillo.
-La entrega inmediata de las lista de los dueños de las guarderías subrogadas.
-Apoyo de por vida, médico y psicológico, para los niños y las niñas en tratamiento así como a los familiares de todas las víctimas de esta tragedia.
-Revisión inmediata de la legislación en materia de guarderías desde una perspectiva que enfatice los aspectos educativo y de seguridad social e impida que éstas sean manejadas como meros negocios.
-Reforma de los códigos penales para que la negligencia, cuando afecte la vida o la integridad física o psicológica de niños y niñas, sea considerada “delito grave”.

¡Por nuestros niños y niñas: Contra la impunidad!

1.- Olga Durón
2.- Esther Cimet Shoijet
3.- Andrea Bárcena, Centro Mexicano para los Derechos de la Infancia
4.- Raquel Bárcena, Centro Mexicano para los Derechos de la Infancia
5.- Patricia Bárcena, Centro Mexicano para los Derechos de la Infancia
6.- Mireya Cueto
7.- Vicenta Hernández Haddad
8.- Mujeres Aportando a Mujeres, A.C.
9.- Aurora Montaño
10.- Verónica Ortiz Lawrenz
11.- Hebe Rosell
12.- Berta Hiriart
13.- Guadalupe Lozada
14.- Ofelia Quijano
15.- Jesús Anaya Rosique
16.- Beatriz Zalce
17.- Rosina Conde
18.- Dana Gelinas
19.- Angélica de Icaza
20.- Irma Gallegos
21.- Guadalupe Lara
22.- Patricia Vega
23.- María Alicia Haddad
24.- Aidé Grijalva
25.- Paloma Saiz Tejero
26.- Alma Cázares Ruiz
27.- Carlos Anaya Rosique
28.- Elia Baltasar
29.- José Luis Flores
30.- Armando Vega Gil
31.- Rosa del C. Sánchez Anzúres
32.- Eduardo Mosches
33.- Silvana Rabinovich
34.- Mabel García Dejean
35.- Rossana Cassigoli



INVITAMOS
A la marcha de duelo y de protesta “Por nuestros niños y niñas: Contra a la impunidad”:
*Nos acompañan padres y madres de familia de los niños y niñas de la Guardería ABC de Hermosillo, Sonora.
*Y representante de la Comisión de Derechos Humanos del Distrito Federal.
Sábado 4 de julio, 10 a.m. Salimos de las oficinas del IMSS en Reforma hacia la Representación del gobierno de Sonora, en Goldsmith 228, Polanco. Si puedes, lleva ropa clara y un listón de duelo en el brazo izquierdo. Por razones obvias, no se admitirán carteles ni consignas de ningún partido político.

The Guardian en youtube

Sobre los crímenes de guerra en Gaza. Información documentada importante que acude a ambas partes para obtener respuestas. Se agradece el envío a Viviana Nardoni.
http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=mLZgNy46aTQ&feature=channel

Palabras de aliento para nuestra iniciativa de parte de una ONG israelí por los derechos humanos

Con el fin de establecer contactos con las familias sobrevivientes de los niños muertos, hemos recibido una alentadora respuesta de ACRI (ONG israelí por los derechos humanos) a nuestra iniciativa. Seguimos su consejo y escribimos a UNRWA y Guishah. Todavía no tenemos respuesta. Esperamos tenerla pronto y publicarla en el blog a fin de que cada uno pueda comunicarse con las familias. El mensaje que sigue, escrito en letras cuadradas, constituye un testimonio más de que en Israel no hay un pensamiento único y que cada vez hay más voces que buscan la paz y la dignidad. Es importante traducirlas en todas las lenguas de Babel.

שלום רב,שמי רונית סלע ואני רכזת קשרי חוץ באגודה לזכויות האזרח. תודה שפניתם אלינו, היוזמה שלכם נשמעת מקסימה. כל הכבוד.
לארגון שלנו אין פרטים של משפחות ברצועת עזה.
מי שיש לו הוא ראש אונר"א בעזה.
UNRWA - UN relief and work agency for Palestinian refugees
אפשרות אחרת היא ליצור קשר עם גישה, ארגון ישראלי שעוסק במצור על רצועת עזה.
www.gisha.org
.בהצלחה בפעילותכם המבורכת,רונית

"Mi nombre es Ronit Sela y soy la encargada de relaciones exteriores en la unión para los derechos del ciudadano. Gracias por haberse dirigido a nosotros, su iniciativa parece ser maravillosa. Los felicito. Nuestra organizcación no tiene datos de familias en la Franja de Gaza. Quien los tiene es el que preside la UNRWA. Otra posibilidad es que ustedes se comniquen con Guisha (organización israelí que se ocupa del sitio de la Franja de Gaza). Suerte en su bendita laborRonit"

Ciclo de cine "¿Paz o Pax en Medio Oriente?

Bajo el cañón de Israel - Reportaje diario El País

http://www.elpais.com:80/articulo/reportajes/canon/Israel/elpepuintori/20090628elpdmgrep_5/Tes

¿Qué tipo de solución con dos estados? I. Wallerstein

¿Qué tipo de solución con dos estados?
Immanuel Wallerstein
Ahora que el presidente Obama ha puesto su peso tan abierta y públicamente tras el concepto de una solución” con dos estados para resolver la controversia/lucha entre Palestina e Israel, tal “solución” podría lograrse en los años venideros. La razón es simple. Expresada en lo abstracto, dicha solución tiene un abrumador respaldo en la opinión pública mundial. Las encuestas muestran que los israelíes judíos están en favor, como lo está la mayoría de los judíos en otras partes del mundo. El respaldo en el mundo árabe es fuerte y vasto. Aun Hamas indica que está dispuesto a aceptar el concepto de dos estados sobre la base de una “tregua” indefinida en la lucha. Algunas “treguas” en el mundo moderno han durado cuatro siglos. Y más recientemente, ha habido “treguas” al respecto de la península coreana y en Cachemira que llevan más de medio siglo. Algunas “treguas” parecen bastante permanentes.
Lo que parece quedar fuera de la discusión en los días que corren es qué significa la expresión “dos estados”. Existen definiciones muy diversas. Debemos recordar que las últimas negociaciones reales, aquellas entre Yasser Arafat y Ehud Barak en 2000, se fueron a pique en el último minuto en Taba, por definiciones divergentes.
¿Cuáles son los puntos de estas definiciones contrarias? Hay por lo menos seis puntos diferentes que el mero eslogan de “dos estados” esconde.
El primer punto es la definición de soberanía. Por supuesto, los palestinos piensan que soberano significa soberano –un Estado con los mismos poderes de cualquier otro Estado soberano. Aun los líderes políticos israelíes que han aceptado la terminología de los dos estados han pensado en una versión limitada de la soberanía. Por ejemplo, ¿qué tipo de aparato militar tendría un Estado palestino? ¿Controlaría por completo los permisos de sobrevuelo? ¿Tendría un control ilimitado de sus fronteras?
El segundo punto es por supuesto el de las fronteras de tal Estado. Tanto la Organización para la Liberación de Palestina (OLP) como Hamas sienten que aceptar las fronteras de 1967 es ya una enorme concesión de su parte. Ciertamente no esperan obtener nada menos que eso. Pero tales fronteras, por supuesto, no incluyen los asentamientos judíos en los territorios ocupados, ni Jerusalén oriental. Podrían ser aceptables diminutos ajustes de dichas fronteras. Pero diminutos quiere decir en verdad diminutos.
El tercer punto es la democracia interna de Israel. ¿Continuarán teniendo menos derechos los israelíes no judíos que los judíos? Ésta es una cuestión central y muy poco discutida.
El cuarto punto es si los dos estados se definirán como estados laicos o como estados religiosos. ¿Será el Estado palestino un Estado musulmán? ¿Continuará siendo Israel un Estado judío?
El quinto punto es el llamado derecho de retorno. Israel se fundó sobre el ilimitado derecho de retorno de cualquier judío que deseara venir a Israel. Los árabes que huyeron de Israel (o que fueron expulsados) exigen el derecho a retornar. Éste ha sido el punto más enredoso en el debate histórico completo. Es una cuestión tanto de demografía como de tierra. Los palestinos aceptarían un gesto meramente simbólico en esta cuestión, si todos los otros puntos se resolvieran de los modos que consideren apropiados.
Finalmente, por supuesto, está la cuestión de qué ocurriría con los asentamientos judíos ya existentes en los territorios ocupados. Es concebible que los palestinos afirmen que algunos de ellos podrían quedarse donde están. Pero parece muy poco probable que los colonos accedieran a permanecer en un Estado palestino, o que estarían dispuestos a aceptar ser evacuados a Israel.
Ahora, ¿qué va a hacer Obama? Él ha tomado una postura fuerte sobre dos cuestiones que el gobierno de ultraderecha israelí se rehusaba a aceptar: no más expansiones de ningún tipo en cuanto a los asentamientos existentes y un compromiso con la solución de dos estados. Esto es incuestionablemente positivo y valiente en el contexto de la política interna de Estados Unidos.
Sin embargo, corre el riesgo de poner en peligro cualquier solución real. Porque hay que considerar la siguiente posibilidad. Que Obama consiga torcerle fuertemente el brazo al primer ministro israelí Netanyahu, que éste conceda ambos puntos, y haga ajustes en su gabinete a la luz de este viraje en la posición. Netanyahu ya aceptó el principio de dos estados, pero a condición de que el Estado palestino sea un Estado desmilitarizado. ¿No revirará entonces pidiendo a Obama que ahora los palestinos deben hacer concesiones comparables? Pero en realidad no estaría hablando de que la Autoridad Palestina deba “controlar la violencia” –el mantra gubernamental israelí usual. Estaría pidiendo concesiones en todos los puntos que he mencionado –en ninguno de los cuales podría hoy el liderazgo palestino hacer alguna concesión significativa.
Los valientes gestos de Obama resultarían entonces un modo de distraer la atención de los puntos subyacentes reales.
Traducción: Ramón Vera Herrera
© Immanuel Wallerstein

230 académicos israelíes por la memoria veraz

Gracias a Néstor Braunstein por el envío de esta nota.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1095662.html

Corto "Quitar el encierro - dar chance a la vida"

Un cortometraje sobre la situación actual en Gaza hecho por la organización israelí Guishá. Video de youtube (en inglés y en hebreo):

New online film marking two years of Gaza closure:
It’s not a reality show - It’s reality

www.gisha.org/2years


Wednesday, June 17, 2009 – “Lift the closure - give life a chance” is the message of a new online film released today by eight human rights organizations in Israel to mark the two years of closure that Israel has imposed on the Gaza Strip.

In the 60-second online film released today, the organizations claim that two years of tight closure have not provided security but rather created a situation in which both sides lose, Palestinians and Israelis. The film is posted online and is being disseminated through social networking sites and blogs in Israel and around the world.

Since June 2007, Israel has tightened the closure of the Gaza Strip, almost completely preventing passage of goods and people to and from the Strip. “The policy of the closure has harsh consequences for 1.5 million people who are prevented from realizing basic rights,” say the organizations. “Israel must lift the closure of the Gaza Strip for the betterment of both sides”.

To view the film click here.

Participating organizations:
Gisha -Legal Center for Freedom of Movement * Adalah * The Association for Civil Rights in Israel * B'Tselem * HaMoked * Physicians for Human Rights - Israel * The Public Committee Against Torture in Israel * Yesh Din



Media and Public Advocacy
>>>>
News Releases
Testimonials
Gisha in the Media
Publications and Reports

El escritor David Grossman: "el mensaje de Netanyahu es que no habrá paz"

Netanyahu's message is there will be no peace
By David Grossman
Tags: Barack Obama, Palestinians

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech was indeed, as it has been decribed, the speech of our lives. Our bogged-down, hopeless lives.

El artículo completo en http://www.haaretz.com:80/hasen/spages/1093572.html

¡Abran las puertas! Llamado

http://peace.lines.free.fr/IsraelPalestine/OuvrezLesPortes.htm

Editorial de La Jornada, 15 de junio de 2009 - "Medio Oriente: paz sin condiciones"

Ayer, en un discurso leído en la Universidad de Bar-Ilan, en las inmediaciones de Tel Aviv, el primer ministro de Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, respaldó por primera vez la creación de un Estado palestino, con la condición de que éste carezca de ejército, sea incapaz de hacerse de armamento y decline imponer limitaciones sobre su espacio aéreo a las milicias israelíes. Al mismo tiempo, aunque señaló que su gobierno no tiene la intención de crear nuevos asentamientos judíos en territorios palestinos, Netanyahu advirtió que no impedirá el crecimiento natural” de éstos –eufemismo con el que los gobernantes israelíes tratan de justificar la constante expansión de esos enclaves ilegales–, a efecto de “permitir que los residentes lleven una vida normal”.
Debe señalarse, por principio de cuentas, que esta alocución se produce a sólo 10 días de que el presidente de Estados Unidos, Barack Obama, emitió en El Cairo, Egipto, un discurso orientado a la reconciliación entre su país y el mundo islámico, en el que el mandatario estadunidense enfatizó la “intolerable” situación que vive la población palestina a consecuencia del asedio israelí, así como “la ilegalidad” de los robos de tierras perpetrados por el régimen de Tel Aviv. De tal forma, las declaraciones hechas ayer por el primer ministro de Israel parecen obedecer, más que a una genuina voluntad de reconocer el derecho de los palestinos a formar un Estado y vivir en él, a una intención de congraciarse con Washington –ante las presiones lanzadas en semanas recientes por el presidente Obama– sin molestar demasiado a los halcones y las posiciones conservadoras de la clase política israelí –uno de cuyos miembros más prominentes es el propio Netanyahu– y a la coalición de derecha que domina la Knesset (parlamento).
Más allá de estas consideraciones, las condiciones que el gobierno israelí pretende imponer son improcedentes, en primer lugar porque incurren en el absurdo de exigir, para la construcción de un Estado palestino, la claudicación de principios y atributos básicos que lo definan como tal: el control sobre su territorio, la facultad de detentar el monopolio de la fuerza y la violencia legítimas, y la existencia de un ejército permanente y regular consagrado a funciones de defensa nacional. Es claro, además, que un Estado conformado según las condiciones enumeradas ayer por Netanyahu quedaría inerme ante la amenaza constante del país hebreo –potencia militar con un largo historial de agresiones colonialistas en la región–, y que nada podría evitar que se repitiesen escenarios como los que el mundo presenció a principios de este año, cuando el ejército israelí bombardeó la franja de Gaza y asesinó a miles de sus habitantes.
El premier israelí incurrió en una distorsión adicional al insinuar que la preservación de los asentamientos ilegales de israelíes en territorios palestinos es un elemento necesario para que los residentes lleven “una vida normal”: por el contrario, la restitución a sus legítimos dueños de las tierras palestinas robadas por la vía de la construcción de enclaves israelíes en Cisjordania y la porción oriental de Jerusalén constituye, de hecho, una condición necesaria para la paz. Al día de hoy tales asentamientos, en conjunto con los castigos colectivos que Tel Aviv aplica de manera continua a la población de Gaza, no sólo constituyen un despojo a todas luces injustificable, sino que hacen imposible la vida cotidiana de los palestinos en su propia tierra; son, además, un factor de permanente descontento y de tensión en la región entre las poblaciones de uno y otro bandos, y terminan por dotar de bases sociales y argumentos a las expresiones terroristas de algunos sectores fundamentalistas palestinos.
Una solución para resolver de raíz la crisis de Medio Oriente requiere, como un primer paso imprescindible, el fin de la ocupación que Tel Aviv mantiene en los territorios palestinos; el cese de la aplicación de las estrategias de limpieza étnica seguidas en Al Qods –nombre árabe de la Jerusalén oriental– y en Cisjordania, y el pleno acatamiento a las resoluciones 242 y 338 de la ONU, que estipulan el retiro israelí de Cisjordania y la franja de Gaza, y la devolución a sus legítimos dueños de la Jerusalén oriental en los límites que se tenían hasta antes de la Guerra de los Seis Días, en 1967.
En la circunstancia actual, en suma, la salida al añejo conflicto entre israelíes y palestinos no pasa por la imposición de condiciones por Tel Aviv, sino por el cumplimiento de la legalidad internacional y por el pleno reconocimiento de los derechos de los palestinos a constituir un Estado –con todo lo que ello implica– y vivir en él.

Llamado del movimiento "Paz ahora" para manifestarse el domingo 14 de junio en la Unviersidad Bar Ilan

Dimanche 14 juin, Netanyahou prononcera au centre "Begin-Sadate" del¹Université Bar-Ilan un discours de politique générale censé répondre auxexigences américaines (gel de la colonisatio, deux Etats pour deux peuples).L¹administration américaine, à qui le gouvernement Netanyahou a adressé lesgrandes lignes de ce discours, ont déjà fait connaître leur mécontentement. Par ailleurs, la droite israélienne a préparé le terrain en passant commanded¹un sondage. Alors que, régulièrement, tous les sondages montraientjusqu¹ici que les Israéliens étaient en majorité pour la fin de lacolonisation, celui-ci montre qu¹une majorité d¹Israéliens seraient contrela gel de la colonisation. Americans for Peace Now s¹est élevé contre laméthodologie pour le moins douteuse de ce sondage :http://peacenowconversation.org/?p=205 (en anglais). C¹est dans ce climat que Shalom Asrhav appelle à manifiester dimanche : "Bibi, sois courageux et suis les traces de Begin" Dimanche, 19h, entrée principale de l¹Université Bar-Ilan. Dimanche , le premier ministre dévoilera son programme politique au centre"Begin-Sadate" de l¹Université Bar-Ilan.Joignez-vous à nous pour exiger du premier ministre qu¹il prenne desdécisions courageuses.Exigeons du premier ministre :­ Suis les traces de Begin !­ Begin était soucieux des intérêts d¹Israël et a fait la paix avecl¹Egypte.­ Aujourd¹hui, c¹est ton tour de garantir l¹existence d¹Israël en tantqu¹Etat juif : deux Etats pour deux peuples ! Nous avons déjà compris que le gouvernement Netanyahou est un gouvernementdu refus. Le moment est venu de manifester dans la rue. Transports :­ Depuis Jérusalem : RV Gan haPa¹amon ­ 17h 45 ­ Contact Tammytammy@peacenow.org.il <mailto:tammy@peacenow.org.il> - 054-8080498­ Depuis Tel-Aviv : RV gare ferroviaire Arlozoroff 18h 45. ContactTammy.­ Depuis Haïfa : RV Centre Solel Boneh 17h. Contact Yossef 052-247768

Uri Avnery's Column (enviado por Eduardo Mosches)

The Tone and the Music
06/06/09

WHILE OBAMA proclaims the 21st century, the government of Israel is returning to the 19th.
ONE MAN spoke to the world, and the world listened.
He walked onto the stage in Cairo, alone, without hosts and without aides, and delivered a sermon to an audience of billions. Egyptians and Americans, Israelis and Palestinians, Jews and Arabs, Sunnis and Shiites, Copts and Maronites – and they all listened attentively.
He unfolded before them the map of a new world, a different world, whose values and laws he spelled out in simple and clear language - a mixture of idealism and practical politics, vision and pragmatism.
Barack Hussein Obama – as he took pains to call himself – is the most powerful man on earth. Every word he utters is a political fact.
“A HISTORIC SPEECH”, pronounced commentators in a hundred languages. I prefer another adjective:
The speech was right.
Every word was in its place, every sentence precise, every tone in harmony. The masterpiece of a man bringing a new message to the world.
From the very first word, every listener in the hall and in the world felt the honesty of the man, that his heart and his tongue were in harmony, that this is not a politician of the old familiar sort – hypocritical, sanctimonious, calculating. His body language was speaking, and so were his facial expressions
That’s why the speech was so important. The new moral integrity and the sense of honesty increased the impact of the revolutionary content.
AND A REVOLUTIONARY speech it certainly was.
In 55 minutes, it not only wiped away the eight years of George W. Bush, but also much of the preceding decades, from World War II on.
The American ship has turned – not with the sluggishness everyone would have expected, but with the agility of a speedboat.
That is much more than a political change. It touches the roots of the American national consciousness. The President spoke to hundreds of million US citizens no less than to a billion Muslims.
The American culture is based on the myth of the Wild West, with its Good Guys and Bad Guys, violent justice, dueling under the midday sun. Since the American nation is composed of immigrants from all over the world, its unity seems to require a threatening, world-encompassing evil enemy, like the Nazis and the Japs, or the Commies. After the collapse of the Soviet empire, this role was taken over by Islam.
Cruel, fanatical, bloodthirsty Islam; Islam as the religion of murder and destruction; an Islam lusting for the blood of women and children. This enemy captured the imagination of the masses and supplied material for television and cinema. It provided lecture topics for learned professors and fresh inspiration for popular writers. The White House was occupied by a moron who declared a world-wide “War on Terrorism”.
When Obama is now uprooting this myth, he is revolutionizing American culture. He wipes away the picture of one enemy, without painting another in its place. He preaches against the violent, adversary attitude itself, and starts to work to replace it with a culture of partnership between nations, civilizations and religions.
I see Obama as the first great messenger of the 21st century. He is the son of a new era, where the economy is global and the whole of humanity faces the danger to the very existence of life on the planet Earth. An era where the Internet connects a boy in New Zealand with a girl in Namibia in real time, where a disease in a small Mexican village spreads all over the globe within days.
This world needs a world law, a world order, a world democracy. That’s why this speech really was historic: Obama outlined the basic contours of a world constitution.
WHILE OBAMA proclaims the 21st century, the government of Israel is returning to the 19th.
That was the century when a narrow, egocentric, aggressive nationalism took root in many countries. A century that sanctified the belligerent nation which oppresses minorities and subdues neighbors. The century that gave birth to modern anti-Semitism and to its response – modern Zionism.
Obama’s vision is not anti-national. He spoke with pride about the American nation. But his nationalism is of another sort: an inclusive, multi-cultural and non-sexist nationalism, which includes all the citizens of a country and respects other nations.
This is the nationalism of the 21st century, which is inexorably striving towards supranational, regional and world-wide structures.
Compared to this, how miserable is the mental world of the Israeli Right! How miserable is the violent, fanatical-religious world of the settlers, the chauvinist ghetto of Netanyahu, Lieberman and Barak, the racist-fascist closed-in world of their Kahanist allies!
One has to understand this moral and spiritual dimension of Obama’s speech before considering its political implications. Not only in the political sphere are Obama and Netanyahu on a collision course. The underlying collision is between two mental worlds which are as distinct from each other as the sun and the moon.
In Obama’s mental world, there is no place for the Israeli Right or its equivalents elsewhere. Not for their terminology, not for their “values”, and still less for their actions.
IN THE political sphere, too, a huge gap has opened up between the governments of Israel and the USA.
During the last few years, successive Israeli governments have ridden the wave of Islamophobia that has spread throughout the West. The Islamic world was considered the deadly enemy, America was galloping grimly towards the Clash of Civilizations, every Muslim was a potential terrorist.
Israel’s right-wing leaders could rejoice. After all, the Palestinians are Arabs, the Arabs are Muslims, the Muslims are Terrorists – so that Israel was assured a central place in the war of the Sons of Light against the Sons of Darkness.
That was a Garden of Eden for racist demagogues. Avigdor Lieberman could advocate the expulsion of the Arabs from Israel, Ellie Yishai could enact laws for the revocation of the citizenship of non-Jews. Obscure Members of the Knesset could grab headlines with bills that might have been conceived in Nuremberg.
This Garden of Eden is no more. Whether the implications will become clear quickly or slowly - the direction is obvious. If we continue on our path, we will become a leper colony.
THE TONE makes the music – and this applies also to the President’s words on Israel and Palestine. He spoke at length about the Holocaust – honest and courageous words, full of empathy and compassion, which were received by the Egyptians in silence but with respect. He stressed Israel’s right to exist. And without pausing, he spoke about the suffering of the Palestinian refugees, the intolerable situation of the Palestinians in Gaza, Palestinian aspirations for a state of their own.
He spoke respectfully about Hamas. Not anymore as a “terrorist organization”, but as a part of the Palestinian people. He demanded that they recognize Israel and stop violence, but also hinted that he would welcome a Palestinian unity government.
The political message was clear and unequivocal: the Two-State Solution will be put into practice. He himself will see to that. Settlement activity must cease. Unlike his predecessors, he did not stop at speaking about “Palestinians”, but uttered the decisive word: “Palestine” – the name of a state and a territory.
And no less important: the Iran war has been struck from the agenda. The dialogue with Tehran, as a part of the new world, is not limited in time. As from now, no one can even dream about an American OK for an Israeli attack.
HOW DID official Israel respond? The first reaction was denial. “An unimportant speech”. “There was nothing new”. The establishment commentators picked out a few pro-Israeli sentences from the text and ignored all the others. And after all, “these are just words. So he talked. Nothing will come out of it.”
That is nonsense. The words of the President of the United States are more than just words. They are political facts. They change the perceptions of hundreds of millions. The Muslim public listened. The American public listened. It may take some time for the message to sink in. But after this speech, the pro-Israel lobby will never be the same as it was before. The era of “foile shtik” (Yiddish for sneaky tricks) is over. The sly dishonesty of a Shimon Peres, the guileful deceits of an Ehud Olmert, the sweet talking of a Bibi Netanyahu – all these belong to the past.
The Israeli people must now decide: whether to follow the right-wing government towards an inevitable collision with Washington, as the Jews did 1940 years ago when they followed the Zealots into a suicidal war on Rome – or to join Obama’s march towards a new world.

4 de junio - Día Internacional de los Niños Inocentes Víctimas de Agresión

(Gracias a Viviana Nardoni por esta información)

Resolución: A/RES/ES-7/8
El 19 de agosto de 1982, en su período extraordinario de sesiones de emergencia sobre la cuestión de Palestina, la Asamblea General, "consternada ante el gran número de niños palestinos y libaneses que han sido víctimas inocentes de los actos de agresión de Israel", decidió conmemorar, el 4 de junio de cada año, el Día internacional de los niños víctimas inocentes de la agresión (resolución ES-7/8).

cf. http://www.cinu.org.mx/eventos/observancias.htm#infancia
también en http://www.onu.org/Agenda/dias/ninos.htm#Agres

Avnery hoy y marcha en Tel Aviv este sábado 6 de junio "End the Occupation - Start Living"

Gracias nuevamente a Eduardo Mosches.

de Uri Avnery:
"The President of the US understands the interests of Israel much better than Israel's own government. Obama offers a real hope to Israelis and Palestinians while Netanyhau's 'Government of Yesterday' has nothing to offer"
"As an Israeli patriot I must say, without the shadow of a doubt, that at this moment the President of United States understands the interests of Israel much better than Israel's own Prime Minister and his ministers" says Uri Avnery of Gush Shalom, the Israeli Peace Bloc. "In his memorable Cairo speech, as in his entire career so far, President Obama has opened up a horizon of real hope to the citizens of Israel as to the Palestinians and to all Arabs and Muslims â€" as he brought hope to the citizens to the US, who elected him. Conversely, Netayahu's is 'Yesterday's Government' offers no solution of any kind, and whose policy consists of clinging blindly to continued occupation and settlement expansion.
Each year in the beginning of June, Israeli peace seekers demonstrate, in order to remind their fellow- citizens that our country is maintaining a cruel occupation rule over millions of Palestinian inhabitants, already for more than two-thirds of Israel's total history. This year we are also demonstrating in the concrete hope that the end of the occupation is near, the beginning of peace between the state of Israel and the state of Palestine to arise, between Israel and the entire Arab world.
On the short term, the demand for ending settlement expansion, made so forcefully by President Obama, is a correct and justified demand. Not only because the President of the United States is demanding and pressuring, but mainly because that is the true and vital Israeli interest. Construction should be halted in all settlements without exception â€" not a house and not hut, not in isolated settlements and not in settlements blocks, neither natural growth nor artificial growth.
What has no right to exist naturally has no right for natural growth, either. The settlements should never have been built in the first place, and should not continue to exist. Young settlers should be told that they cannot build homes in an occupied territory which would not remain under Israeli rule, and that they must find their future within the recognized borders of Israel â€" the Green Line borders. Soon, their parents would join them. "
Contact: Uri Avnery 0505-306440, Adam Keller 0506-709603


Israeli peace Groups to hold protest march in Tel Aviv, Saturday night, June 6 Will call "End the Occupation - Start Living"

On the night of Saturday, June 6, Gush Shalom members will join with those of other peace groups to hold a protest march marking 42 years to the occupation of the West Bank, Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. The rendezvous point would be at Tel-Aviv's Rabin Square at 6.00 pm, from where demonstrators will march along the Ibn Gvirol Street until the Tel Aviv Museum Plaza.
In their joint call for the Saturday march, the peace groups say that ongoing occupation caused a violent narrative of anti-Arab racism and fascism to become prevalent in Israeli society, as manifested in the "Nakba Bill" (aimed at forbidding Arab Israeli citizens commemorating their 1948 disaster), or the "Loyalty Law" (aimed at disenfranchising them altogether). The end of the occupation is needed in order to protest basic democratic rights, also within Israel's own borders.
Also, occupation and frequent wars have brought about a government budget of which half is devoted to pay for past and present military expenditures and settlement maintenance. The 2009-10 budget, too, is marked by sharp slashing of the education and welfare budgets, while military and settlement expenditures are increased. This reinforces the message of the demonstration's main slogan: "End the occupation - Start living".
Contact: Adam Keller (Gush Shalom) 0506-709603
Yoav Goldring (Hadash) 054-6634443
Eilat Maoz (Coalition of Women for Peace) 0508-575729

El "problema" de los refugiados

Una conferencia de Ariela Azoulay del 2008 donde habla del exilio palestino y cómo se hizo de los refugiados un "problema". ¿Hay una retorno para ellos?

Libro - Ilan Pappe - Historia de la Palestina Moderna. Un territorio, dos pueblos.

Información enviada por Eduardo Mosches.
Historia de la Palestina Moderna. Un territorio, dos pueblos llan Pappe (Akal, Madrid, febrero de 2008)
Andrés Criscaut
Le Monde Diplomatique/El Dipló, Buenos Aires, junio 2009
El conflicto palestino israelí ha generado una gran cantidad de información e interpretaciones que dificultan cualquier tipo de abordaje integral y equilibrado. El material disponible en el mundo hispano hablante - más aun en la Argentina- se reduce a una cantidad tan ínfimas como sesgadas. Por esa razón, la aparición de Historia de la Palestina Moderna del historiador israelí “post sionista” Illan Pappe, ex profesor de la Universidad de Haifa y actual docente de la de Exeter, constituye un gran aporte tanto por la síntesis como por la originalidad analítica y abarcativa que plantea. Si su último libro, La limpieza étnica en Palestina (Crítica, 2007), despertó una gran polémica por despejar ciertas disonancias de una realidad medioriental escurridiza y manipulada, esta obra de 2004 es una pieza de divulgación mucho más coherente y matizada, alejada de cualquier tipo de opacidad académica o erudita.

Su importancia radica en lograr un relato transparente que rompe con dos narraciones nacionales contradictorias, superpuestas y, por lo general, tendenciosas. La usual simplificación y polarización del conflicto en términos de victimas y victimarios, ángeles y demonios, “a favor” o “en contra”, es magistralmente desmonta gracias a una lectura mucho más humana y mundana de la vida cotidiana de la “gente” palestina: árabes, judíos, europeos, musulmanes o cristianos por igual. Sin dejar de ser imparcial ni de adjudicar niveles de responsabilidad, este libro logra no ser una “historia de las elites” o de “unos pocos ricos”, y sí un contrapunto “desde abajo”, incluso una interpretación en clave de conflictos de clases, que explica mucho mejor las tensiones dentro -y entre- dos poblaciones que habitan un mismo territorio.
Esto fue posible gracias a la inclusión de una incipiente y cada vez más profesionalizada historiografía palestina, de lo que hasta ahora fue “una historia borrada y olvidada”, y a su vez desvirtuada como un anexo o una reacción al nacionalismo sionista-israelí.
Este libro fundamental deja flotando la sensación de lo absurdo y ficticio de un conflicto funcional a una modernidad que, indudablemente, no trajo ni la mejoría, ni el progreso, ni el bienestar de la gran mayoría de las personas que forman estas dos sociedades “palestinas”.

Martin Buber - Una tierra para dos pueblos

Ediciones Sígueme (Salamanca) y la UNAM publicaron el libro de Martin Buber Una tierra para dos pueblos. Escritos políticos sobre la cuestión judeo-árabe. Este libro contiene conferencias y artículos del filósofo del diálogo seleccionados y prologados por Paul Mendes-Flohr. Puede verse un adelanto en:
http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2009/04/26/sem-martin.html
La publicación de este libro en español atesora elementos para pensar de otro modo el diálogo tan postergado y fallido, en ese sentido la palabra que atraviesa sus páginas es promesa (palabra del otro, escrita con los oídos). Se trata de una invitación a escuchar otras voces en las que se entretejen desde siempre la ética y la política.

Ciclo de cine-debate "¿Paz o pax en Medio Oriente?"

En el marco de la iniciativa ciudadana "Adopta a un niño muerto", ofreceremos el ciclo de cine-debate "¿Paz o pax en Medio Oriente?" con el motivo de acercarnos a este tema difícil a través de excelentes películas y así construir un corpus riguroso en torno al conflicto en Medio Oriente que ayude a abrir el diálogo.
Se trata de una selección de films sobre el tema, que serán comentados por diversos intelectuales, artistas y académicos mexicanos en un diálogo con el público. Será los martes de agosto y septiembre, a las 19 hrs. en el Centro Cultural Universitario.
Pronto publicaremos el programa detallado en este blog.
Quedan todos invitados.

Poema de Eduardo Mosches - "Duelo"

Duelo
Eduardo Mosches

Las nubes se dispersan con el empuje
de un viento creado por aviones,
que rasga el momento previo al desayuno.

La mesa se tambalea junto al niño
cae el vaso y su líquido
en una estela lenta quebradiza.

Sus ojos se impregnan de pavor
ante el sonido duro seco estridente
la garganta se cierra como puerta
de metal sobre unos dedos.

La explosión hizo trizas el espejo
de sus propias facciones.


El polvillo de la casa
será acariciado con suavidad
por el sol que ha salido
como todas las mañanas.

a la memoria de Omar Hussein Dardouna, niño asesinado en Gaza

Uri Avnery - "Racistas a favor de la democracia"

URI AVNERY

“Racists for Democracy”HOW LUCKY we are to have the extreme Right standing guard over our democracy. Full English text in the end

Avnery columns' archive
http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/avnery