ISM, "HEARING DATE FOR ISM 8 POSTPONED AGAIN. Bail Still Denied" (July 15, 03)|
Draft Resisters Parent's Forum, "Young Israelis Refusing to Join an
Army of Occupation" (July 15, 03)
Modar S., "Why did they kill Eyad?" (July 13, 03)
Hans Lebrecht, "ANSTATT AUSFÜHRUNG DER VON ISRAEL GEFORDERTEN ROADMAP SCHRITTE
IRREFÜHRENDE MEDIENFÜTTERUNG" (July 13, 03)
Anis's comment on "The Bi-national State: The Wolf Shall Dwell With The Lamb" by Uri Avnery" (July 12, 03)
STOP USA - Newsletter n° 1, (www.stopusa.be), COMPLAINT AGAINST GENERAL FRANKS (July 11, 03)
Alijah Gordon (2003): "IN THE TIME OF THE MISHMISH. A Painting in Twenty Parts", BOOK REVIEW by Adib S. Kawar. (July 11, 03)
INTERNATIONAL SOLIDARITY MOVEMENT, Press Release, July 15, 2003:
HEARING DATE FOR ISM 8 POSTPONED AGAIN. Bail Still Denied
The hearing for the ISM 8, 4 of which have been held since
Wednesday July 9, and 4 since Thursday July 10, has again
been postponed, with no actual court date yet made known.
The Ministry of the Interior has cancelled the visas of the eight
activists and continues to deny them bail. Below is the position
of the State of Israel based on paperwork they submitted to the
court (thank you to Gila Svirsky for the translation):
The position of the respondent is that the deportation of the
Plaintiffs from Israel should not be delayed and they should not
be released from custody, not even within the Tel-Aviv district and
with a commitment by the Plaintiffs not to leave that area.
The position of the Respondent is based on the
recommendation of security personnel, according to which the
organization I.S.M. and its activists are perceived to be a security
The Respondent has information that links all the Plaintiffs to the
organization I.S.M. This information will be provided to the court
in the presence of one side, if required.
The goal of the I.S.M. organization (hereinafter "the organization")
is to thwart the activity of the security forces in the territories
impede their work of preventing terrorism by confrontations with
I.D.F. soldiers, barricading themselves in the homes of suicide
terrorists to prevent their demolition, transport of Palestinians
between various areas during periods of closure, and the like.
The activities of members of the organization, as described
above, hamper the security activities of the I.D.F. and sometimes
even endanger the safety of I.D.F. soldiers.
The Israeli government is engaged in efforts to try to deligitimize
the ISM and label the upholding of international law a crime.
Seeking to deport the ISM activists is a tactic used to try to break
the phenomena of international solidarity with the Palestinian
freedom struggle and an attack on the nonviolent resistance to
the Israeli occupation.
The four arrested in the Jenin area at the peace camp in
Arrabony Tobias Karlsson (SWEDEN), Tarek Loubani
(CANADA), Fredrick Lind (DENMARK) and Bill Capowski (USA)
were engaged in peaceful protest with Palestinian villagers
against the illegal confiscation of Palestinian land and the
erection of a despicable Apartheid Wall. The four arrested in
Nablus, Daniel Knutsson (SWEDEN), Alex Perry (UK), Saul Reid
(UK) and Thomas Pellas (FRANCE) were nonviolently removing
roadblocks that prevent Palestinians from traveling freely in and
out of their own villages. The eight ISMers on trial and slated for
deportation have broken no laws other than the laws of an
occupation force that does not respect the human rights of the
Furthermore, the 8 ISMers are seeking to continue to be and
work with Palestinians in Palestinian cities, towns and villages
and were snatched from Palestinian areas by Israeli soldiers.
Since April 2002, 50 ISM volunteers have been deported and
persons suspected of being "Palestinian sympathizers"
attempting to enter Israel (the only way into Palestinian
territories) have been refused entry. In further attempts to isolate
Palestinians and stop the phenomena of international solidarity
and protests against Israel's brutality towards Palestinians,
violence and intimidation against international human rights
defenders has increased:
- a peace march in Beit Jala in April 2002 was met with live
ammunition from the Israeli military resulting in the injury of 6
international peace activists
- Caoihme Butterly, an international peace worker was shot in
the leg in Jenin in November 2002 while trying to stop Israeli
soldiers from firing at Palestinian children
- ISM volunteer, Rachel Corrie, was run over by an Israeli driven
bulldozer on March 16, 2003 while nonviolently protesting the
demolition of Palestinian land and property in Rafah, Gaza
- ISM volunteer Eric Howanietz hit with a volley of rubber-coated
steel bullets in Nablus on March 20, 2003, while clearly
identifiable as an unarmed civilian in a florescent vest.
- ISM volunteer Brian Avery shot through the face with a high
caliber bullet from an Israeli APC on April 5, 2003 while unarmed
and clearly identifiablein a florescent vest
- ISM volunteer Tom Hurndall shot in the back of the head on
April 11, 2003 in Rafah, Gaza Strip, while unarmed and clearly
identifiable in a florescent vest, helping Palestinian children get
out of the line of Israeli fire.
On April 16, 2003 Israeli Army Chief of Staff Moshe Yaalon stated
"I have just given an order to remove the organization's activists
from the area..."
ISM uses nonviolence to confront violence and is aware that this
endangers perpetrators of violence, human rights abuses and
colonization. We don't expect justice from a government that
sanctions the above, but do call on the international community
to join our efforts and not remain silent.
Draft Resisters Parent's Forum, Press Release, July 15, 2003:
Speaking Truth to Power:
An Ode to Humanism in the Testimony of Young Israelis Refusing to Join an
Army of Occupation
Despite the fact that the date was chosen arbitrarily, the deliberations
that took place in the Jaffa military courtroom are a tribute to Bastille
Day. In the framework of the trial of the five draft resisters who are
refusing to join the IDF because their conscience does not
permit them to serve in an army of occupation, the court heard the testimony of Shimri
Tsameret, Adam Maor and Noam Bahat. (The other two, Haggai Matar and Matan
Kaminer testified in a previous session). The values of freedom, equality and solidarity
were woven into the testimony of the three. The courtroom was packed with supporters,
including Israel Prize laureates Shulamit Aloni and Professor Dan Meron.
The trial began with the testimony of Col. Noam Burstein, who heads the Conscript
Division in the Mobilization Base. In this capacity Burstein was responsible for the
repeated sentencing of the conscientious objectors. In the cross examination by Adv.
Dov Khinin, the defendents' attorney, Burstein admitted that he had never seen any
official order or regulation dealing with conscientious objectors and that he does not know
of any such official procedure, despite the fact the during the period that he holds his
position, he was personally responsible for sending tens of conscientious objectors to
prison. Burstein admitted that he had never been present in any briefing on the subject of
conscientious refusers and that he had never received any tools from the IDF to deal with
the subject. He explained that the method of dealing with refusenicks is a "mixture of
personal discussions and prison sentences", which often convinces the refusenick to
change his mind and agree to be mobilized.
After this, the court continued to hear the testimony of Shimri Tsameret. In the first part
of his testimony on June 24, 2003 Shimri began to explain the motives for his
conscientious refusal. He concentrated on the tremendous damage done to Israeli
society by the endless occupation. Previously he talked about the damage from terror
acts, the psychological harm to soldiers serving in the occupation and the seepage of
corrupt norms into Israeli society. " I believe that the war we are engaged in," he said,
"could be avoided and only political egoism as well as errors of judgment prevent the
public and its leaders from being stopped. This is a war of choice and not necessity and
its victims are unnecessary. "
Shimri gave examples of a list of subjects that vanish from the public's agenda because
of the 'security situation.' Among other matters, he cited social problems, economic
polarization, ecological issues, and discrimination between different groups. This
distorted public agenda, totally determined by the occupation and problems stemming
from it, leads to the loss of faith of the public in its leaders and to the degeneration of the
media. and the deterioration of Israeli democracy. During the testimony, the prosecution
staff was augmented by General Enat Ron, head of the army prosecutor's office. By
chance, a few minutes after her appearance, Shimri cited her as being responsible for
denials and whitewashing in the case of the death of a child, Khalil el Morabi. He
expressed sorrow over the lack of any media coverage in this affair as a symptom of the
very same moral degradation which he reviewed.
Shimri concluded his testimony with a number of personal experiences, some of which
were based on participation in the activities of women from MachsomWatch (Checkpoint
Watch) and other events regarding his family history. In citing the conclusion of the play
"Ashkavah" (Requiem) by Hanoch Levin, he explained the individual's commitment to
assume personal responsibility and to shape his own life and the life of the society in
which he lives. "It is forbidden to give up on the dream", he said. "It is the refusal to give
up on my hopes and my dreams - which has motivated me in my decision to refuse."
Adam Maor testified after him. Adam spoke of a number of cases which typified the evils
of the occupation and the critical role of the IDF in enforcing these evils. It was like that
in the Kfar Yanoun affair, as well as the Southern area of the Hebron hills. "Any person
who saw or heard about what happened in Yanoun would be shocked. Every sane
person would understand that Avery Ron, the settler, is the leader of all of the activity in
the area and is a terrorist, and even a model of terrorism. But I want to stress at this
point that my wrath is not directed at the settler, Avery Ron and his gang. Religious and
nationalist fanaticism and severe manifestations of racism such as these are things that
have happened all over the world and in every period. Many groups, including the Jewish
people, have suffered such pogroms. The question is, in my mind, what does the sane
majority do in such cases. Of course, if Avery and his gang would come to my house
and rob me, no one would permit this to go on for two hours, or more than once. Of
course, if the Yanoun residents would enter a settlement, the army would respond with
speed. But when Avery and his gang torment Palestinians they enjoy immunity if not full
cooperation. The sane majority in this case does not stop the terrorists, it finances
them, defends them and cooperates with them. Thus, people who have nothing in
common with these fanatics, defend them, discriminate between them and their victims,
and implement many of the deeds that the IDF performs to advance the criminal
settlement project such as the annexation of land from Palestinians for military purposes,
so as to build new settlements and the like. When the IDF becomes a tool in the hands
of fanatics, all its soldiers, either as a result of a lack of understanding or simply not
caring, become fanatics themselves."
Adam talked about his meeting with Brian Avery and his sincere admiration for the
International Solidarity Movement volunteer who was seriously wounded when he tried to
defend Palestinians in Jenin. He concluded his testimony by telling of his love for music
and how this guides him in his refusal to deny a normal life from the Palestinian
population. "If you participate in the occupation you become responsible for it,
responsible for the immoral acts perpetrated in the territories and responsible for the
Noam Bahat testified after him. His testimony was devoted mainly to his role as an
educator and the deep contradictions that he discovered between the educational system
which disseminates "occupation values" and between his understanding of morality. In
cases where the law harms the interest of the weak, physically and spiritually, violates
their freedom, discriminates against them, renders them illegitimate or denies them
freedom of expression or freedom of conscience or other freedoms anchored in basic
freedoms, I consider it my civil and moral duty to violate the law. You can try other
things, but if they are not successful you cannot allow the law to eliminate people's basic
Noam analyzed the values inculcated in Israeli youth via the educational system and
discussed his efforts as a youth leader to change this reality. He also discussed the
way he was exposed to the level of crime perpetrated by Israel against the Palestinians.
He expressed amazement over how very few, the number of people who know about
these tensions. He determined "that everything that appears evil is indeed evil, but
people refuse to understand that they are Goliath and want to see themselves as David,
small, weak, heroic and wise. In truth we are just another country exploiting and
tormenting the Palestinian people and workers almost to the point of slavery. In the face
of this reality," testified Noam, he feels that he "must refuse to join the IDF".
The date of the continuation of the trial is yet to be determined.
Checks earmarked for "legal aid" to New Profile, POB 6187 Ramat HaSharon 47271
For assistance: firstname.lastname@example.org
Modar S., July 13, 2003, "Why did they kill Eyad?"
Dear friends, let me tell you something about my friend Eyad: Eyad was a 29 years old from Burqeen, a small village to the west of Jenin, married and had 3 kids, the oldest one 6 years old. Eyad was not a high educated person, he used to work as a construction worker or a farmer with his family. Eyad also was not militant, and not active in the recent Intifadah, because he had a wife and 3 kids to raise and to care for them.
It was on Wednesday, 9th July, at 2:30 AM, when the IOF invaded the village, after Israeli special forces sneaked in there and surrounded Eyad's family's house and arrested his brother (Fady) as he is a member in the Islamic Jihad movement (he had been sleeping on the house roof). The IOF killed Eyad and injured his wife in cold blood one hour after having arrested his brother. According to eye-witnesses, Eyad and his wife had been trying to find out what happened in his
family's house - which is situated only a few meters from his own house - after they thought that the IOF had withdrawn. Another eye-witness said that he saw a laser on Eyad's neck while he was on thebalcony of his house before the first shoot, then the IOF started to shoot his body while he was falling on the ground. Eyad was shot by 3 bullets in the neck, chest, and left arm. His wife was also shot by a bullet in the head and her case is very serious. The IOF also prevented the ambulances from entering the place to save Eyad and his wife's lives for more than an hour, while the couple was bleeding on the ground. At last, the IOF allowed the rescue team to take them to the hospital. The doctors there tried to do
something for Eyad, but there was no hope, it was too late. Eyad's wife was sent to another hospital in Nablus, because of her serious injuries, two hours after Eyad died.
The Israeli radio announced that the "IDF" had arrested a very dangerous and wanted terrorist who was about to blow up himself up to kill Israelis after a successful arresting mission. According to Palestinian resources, however, a man was killed and his wife injured. The Israelis didn't even say that Eyad was a dangerous terrorist, maybe there is no need to say that anymore, because the Israeli arguments are always ready: all the Palestinians are terrorists, accused, potential suicide bombers, trying to attack our soldiers etc.
So thank you, IOF, for killing Eyad, and for almost killing his wife, and for turning her into a widow, thank you also for turning his kids into orphans for the rest of their lives. I guess those kids now will have many reasons to "love" Israel...
Hans Lebrecht, Kibbutz Beit-Oren, 13. Juli 2003:
ANSTATT AUSFÜHRUNG DER VON ISRAEL GEFORDERTEN ROADMAP SCHRITTE
Israels Regierungschef Ariel Sharon reiste nach London und wird danach Oslo
einen kurzen Amtsbesuch beehren. Den in Israel veröffentlichten und an die
Auslandskorrespondenten amtlicherseits gefütterten handouts des Presseamtes,
gilt der Besuch Sharons der Aufklärung seiner britischen und norwegischen
Amtskollegen über die angeblichen Machenschaften des palästinensischen
Erzterroristen Jasser Arafat und warum dieser in Zukunft von weiteren
Treffen mit ausländischen Würdenträger absolut ignoriert und boykottiert
werden solle. Klar, auch über die mehr als 800 israelische Opfer des
palästinensischen Terrors wird berichtet, ohne allerdings die mindestens
2,400 Opfer des israelischen Staatsterrors zu vermerken.
Schon der Staastsbesuch des Außenministers Schalom in Italien bei dem jetzt
auch als EU Vorsitender fungierenden Berlusconi war, diesen irreführenden
Medien Berichten zufolge, hauptsächlich dieser anti-Arafat Kampagne
gewidmet. Dabei werden angebliche und tatsächliche Differenzen zwischen
Arafat und seinem, von der Bush und Sharon zu einer Quisling Rolle
degradierte Machmud Abbas (Abu- Masen) unmäßig hochgespielt, obwohl beide
dies als weitaus übertrieben zurückweisen. Mit all dem soll vertuscht
werden, dass Israel nahezu keine einzige seiner der vor sechs Wochen in
Aqaba so feierlich versprochenen Schritte auf der ersten Meile des
angeblichen Friedensfahrplans durchgeführt hat. Nach einem anfänglichen und
extrem übertrieben auf Fernsehschirmen weltweit miterlebten Rückzug der
israelischen Okkupationsarmee aus dem kleinen nördlichsten Teil des Gasa
Streifens und der gnädigsten Erlaubnis, dass die Palästinenser nun auch die
einzige Verbindungsstraße durch die Länge des Streifens in ihrre Heimat
benutzen dürfen, sowie die angebliche Räumung von Bethlehem, obwohl diese
immer noch zwischen israelischen Straßenblocks eingesperrt und isoliert
bleibt, geschah nichts mehr in dieser Richtung. Im Gegenteil, obwohl der
Roadmap Fahrplan die Räumung der nahezu einhundert sogenannten Siedlungs
Außenposten und die Einfrierung der Siedlungstätigkeit Israels auf
palästinensischem Boden fordert, geht der israelische Landraub frisch, fromm
und fröhlich weiter. Erst gestern gab das offizielle palästinensische
Presse Amt der PNA bekannt, dass Israel die Räumung von weiteren Ländereien
in der südlich von Bethlehem gelegenen Ortschaft El-Khadr befohlen habe.
Diese Ortschaft wurde schon seit einigen Jahren aus einem Großteil ihrer
angestammten Ländereien gedrängt, um der Erweiterung der israelischen
Siedlung Efrat zu dienen. (Der Schreiber dieser Zeilen war selbst vor
sieben Jahren leicht verletzt worden, als Polizei und Besatzertruppen eine
Protest Kundgebung israelischer Friedensaktivisten gegen den Landraub in
diesem Dorf brutal auseinander sprengten.)
Die PNA Presse Meldung weist auch darauf hin, dass während der sechs seit
der Aqaba Konferenz vergangenen Wochen nur ein einziger Siedlungs
Außenposten südlich von Nablus, von TV teams aufgebauscht berichtet,
tatsächlich geräumt wurde. Demgegenüber seien 18 neue solche als
Außenposten getarnte Siedlungs Brutnester im besetzten Westjordanland
Was die zur vorgesehenen Vertrauensbildung wichtigen Freilassung von
palästinensischen Intifada Gefangenen betrifft, wird da ebenfalls viel
darüber berichtet, dass da tatsächlich einige Wenige aus den israelischen
Kerkern entlassen wurden, darunter solche, die >>administrativ verhaftet<<
schon zwanzig und mehr Jahre darin schmachteten ohne je einen Richter oder
ein Gericht gesehen zu haben. Aber über die noch lediglich 300 oder 350
weiteren der mehr als 6,000 Gefangenen, die nach Ansicht der Sharon Leute
eventuell noch freigelassen werden sollen, wird immer noch in den
Regierungs- und Armee Gremien, sowie der Presse viel diskutiert. Allerdings
schmachten diese Gefangenen, entgegen den in Umlauf gebrachten
Medienberichten, immer noch eingepfercht hinter Gittern in Kerkern und
Haftlagern. Dagegen werden nahezu täglich, oder besser gesagt nächtlich,
neue, angeblich des Terrorismus verdächtigte Palästinenser gefangen genommen
und brutalen Verhören unterzogen.
Man kann annehmen, dass in London und Oslo die Anklagen von Sharon gegen
Afafat zwar höflich angehört werden, aber sicherlich auch darüber hören
wollen, inwieweit Israel selbst tatsächliche Schritte durchführt, oder
durchzuführen gedenkt, welche der Roadmap Friedensinitiative, der
Vertrauensbildung und einer Feuerpause auf den Weg verhelfen werden. Alle
die von Israel gefütterten Medienberichte können zwar mit mehr oder weniger
Erfolg versuchen die Medien in aller Welt zu beeinflussen. Aber sowohl die
britische, als auch norwegische Regierungen verfügen auch über ihre eignenen
Informationsquellen, deren Berichte sicherlich sich nicht ausschließlich
auf, vom offiziellen Presse Amt in West Jerusalem in Umlauf gesetzte
Berichte verlassen. In London vor Allem verläßt man sich ja auch auf die
Berichterstatter des BBC World Fernsehens und Rundfunk, welche bekanntlich
seit zwei Wochen von der israelischen Regierung (der israelischen Ansicht
einer Presse- und Meinungsfreiheit entsprechend) boykottiert werden, weil
sie einen Dokumentar Bericht über die Erzeugung und Bewaffnung Israels mit
ABC Massenvernichtungswaffen ausgestrahlt hatten (Siehe meinen vorwöchigen
Im Übrigen haben israelische und palästinensische, sowohl auch freiwillige
Friedens- und Menschenrechts Aktivisten aus aller Welt die angeblich so
berühmte demokratische Freiheit Israels wieder einmal zu spüren bekommen.
Gerade dieses Wochenende (12. Juli) wurde eine Gruppe israelischer und
internationaler Friedens- und Menschenrechts Aktivisten, die sich mit
Landraub und Deportation gefährdeten palästinensischen Fellachen von drei
Dörfern südlich von Nablus im Westjordanland solidarisierten, brutal
auseinander gesprengt. Unter den verwundeten und arrestierten Friedensleuten
sind einige Israelis und Menschenrechts Aktivisten aus den USA, Kanada,
England, Schweden und Dänemark. Den Internationalisten droht nun
ENDE des Textes. Beste Brudergrüße,
"The Bi-national State: The Wolf Shall Dwell With The Lamb" by Uri Avnery, July 12, 2003 (update of an article from 2001).
Quote: "No wonder that in these dark times, the bi-national idea is raising its head again in some Israeli left-wing circles. It's a beautiful and noble idea, imbued with faith in humanity. But, like Isaiah's prophecy, it is an idea for the days of the messiah."
Anis: In this article Uri presents the best arguments against a one-state solution in Palestine Israel. He writes:
"It may seem strange that this idealistic vision is reappearing just now, after it has failed the world over."
Anis: Soviet Union, Russia, Yugoslavia, Bosnia, even Canada, Cyprus, Indonesia,
the Philippines and Lebanon are mentioned. Well, who wants a one-state straight away, after what has been going on in the past months. The situation escalated with executions and walls and state terror. Only some of Uri's arguments are not sharp:
"The 20th century has seen several 'utopias' that have caused terrible disasters. The communist vision, for example, was based on the assumption that there is a perfect human being or that human beings can be perfected."
Anis: This sounds to be against visions in general. What does communism have to do with the one-state? Uri then writes:
"One must pose three essential questions: Will both sides accept this solution? Can a bi-national state function? 3. Will it put an end to the conflict? My answer to all three questions is an unqualified ‘no'."
And he continues:
"There is no chance at all that the present, post-holocaust, Israeli generation, or its successor, will accept this solution, which conflicts absolutely with the myth and the ethos of Israel. The aim of the founders of the State of Israel was that the Jews - or a part of them - could at last take their destiny into their own hands. A bi-national state means the abandonment of this aim, and, in practice, the dismantling of Israel itself. The Jews would return to the traumatic experience of a people without a state (...)"
Anis: Why does it prevent the Jews from taking their destiny into their own hands? What kind of destiny are they looking for? There already ARE Palestinians with an Israeli passport, with the passport of the Jewish State. But they are not Jewish. The basic question is how a Jewish or a Christian or a Muslim state could work in the twenty-first century and how it treats minorities. Then:
"Some Palestinians do indeed talk longingly of a bi-national state, but I believe that for some of them, at least, this is just a code word for the elimination of the State of Israel, and for some others an escape from bitter reality to the dream of returning to their homes and villages of the past."
Anis: He could at least give the real arguments of the one-staters the best of which is: lack of officially sanctioned racism. Does a non-Jewish Israeli have the same social outset as a Jewish one? Then Uri writes:
"All this is known, of course, to the adherents of the bi-national idea. In order to escape the contradiction between their vision and reality, they have developed a theory that goes like this: In the beginning, the joint state will indeed be some kind of an apartheid state. But the situation will change gradually. In time, the Arabs will become the majority in this state. Even now, some 5.4 million Jews and 4.6 million Arab Palestinians live between the Mediterranean and the Jordan. (...)"
Anis: What? Dear Uri, this is not what the one-state is about. We do have a kind of apartheid state already in Israel, the concept is there in the media. A joint state cannot be superimposed and then followed, it can only be the result of a process and cannot begin with an apartheid state. Then:
"American Jewry has immense political, economic and media might, and they will not lose it for many years to come. Israel continues to rely on - and will do so for a long time - the guilt feelings of the Christian world inspired by the holocaust."
OK, but don't say that in Germany :-) And for how long exactly will Israel continue to rely on the guilt feelings of the Christian world (in order to continue the control drama at the expense of Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims, and Goyyim)?
"It will take generation, and in the meantime the expansion of the settlements will go on relentlessly. In a bi-national state every Jew can, of course, settle wherever he or she wants."
Anis: This is a good point
"There is great danger even in propagating this idea. It is said that 'the perfect is the enemy of the good.'"
Anis: I didn't say it and I don't believe it.
"The very mention of the bi-national vision will scare the great majority of Israelis, who are now slowly approaching acceptance of the two-state solution, will arouse their most deep-seated existential anxieties and push them into the arms of the extreme right-wing. It will give the Right a powerful weapon: 'What did we tell you? The real aim of the adherents of the two-state solution is to abolish the State of Israel by stages!'"
Anis: What a scared violent people must this be. What a poor people! Who wants to make a state with them, I start to wonder...
"Some of the new advocates of the bi-national solution use a very odd argument. They say: 'Sharon declares that he is for the two-states solution, but he means some enclaves comprising 50% of the occupied territories. Therefore we must not support the establishment of a Palestinian state.'"
Anis: here two things go across: even without the notion of a one-state Sharon's 50% "offer" is doubtful. It is the classic Palestinian dilemma: you can have parts of your land back (and have to give up other parts of your land). Uri writes:
"The simple answer is: should we abandon a good and positive idea just because the enemies of peace pervert it and try to use it for their ends?"
Anis: No Uri, sorry, it is not a good and positive idea. It is to be considered, but it is not a good idea.
"...fight for a Palestinian state in the pre-1967 borders."
Anis: ...is a better idea. Uri concludes:
"We speak of two states with an open border between them, with free movement of people and goods (subject, of course, to mutual agreements). I am convinced that, in the light of the geographical and political facts, a natural process will lead to an organic connection, perhaps a federation, and later, by common consent, to a regional community like the European Union."
Anis: here we come together again. This is the start. This is what we will have to work for now.
"Perhaps a later generation will one day decide to live in one joint state. But today the propaganda for this utopia diverts attention from the practical, immediate objective, at a time when the whole world has accepted the idea of 'two states for two peoples'. This remote utopia blocks the way to a solution that is achievable in the near future and sorely necessary."
Anis: All I want is equal rights for all. Justice for the refugees and justice in the water issue. There will always be Palestine and there will always be Israel. Even in one state. The question is not one state or two states, the question is non-violence and no superiority of a people over another. What will I support now? In the time now I support the two states, there is no other concrete possibility now. Plus I would not want to live with the Jewish Israelis now as a Palestinian, after what Uri writes about them. He closes with these words:
"We shall not be tardy. But there is no point in expecting the Israeli public to be 50 years ahead of the times."
Anis: So he himself envisions this remote utopia in 50 years. Why else would he have written it? ;-)
Deutsche Übersetzung des Artikels von Ellen Rohlfs, www.uri-avnery.de
STOP USA - Newsletter n° 1, (www.stopusa.be), July 11, 2003, COMPLAINT AGAINST GENERAL FRANKS
You were many to sign the complaint, deposited in Brussels. 17 Iraqi en 2 Jordanians accused general Franks, head of the American army in Iraq, of war crimes . This newsletter wants to inform you about the trial, the initiatives of the complainers and of the coordination STOP USA that is supporting them.
This action has been warmly welcomed in a lot of countries. Lots of personalities have signed the appeal to prevent Belgian government from sending the complaint to the US, in other words destroying it. You can find the list of signers on the site www.stopusa.be
THE BELGIAN GOVERNMENT IS LYING: THE COMPLAINT IS STILL IN BELGIUM!
As you have heard, Bush is furious. Washington has threatened to withdraw the seat of NATO from Brussels. The negotiators for the new government have capitulated for this blackmail and have decided to adjust the Belgian law about the universal competence, the so-called ‘Genocide law’.
But this doesn’t mean the complaint against Franks has been classified. The judicial procedure has started and is still going on. The former minister of justice has recently signed the transmission to the US. This allows lawyer Jan Fermon to initiate a complaint before the Council of State. It will be very difficult, even impossible for the future government to get their selves rid off the current procedure, especially because the Council of State already openly has criticised the actions of the government in the judicial procedures.
Anyway the following months the case will stay in Brussels. Your wide and international support is necessary to put pressure on the Belgian government and to demand the right for the victims to a fair trial. We will explain how…
WE NEED YOU ALL TO EXERT PRESSURE
How can we prevent Belgian government from capitulating definitively for Washington and destroying the complaint? By organising the international protest!
Dozens of millions of people have been demonstrating against this war. Current action is a way of continuing that struggle, to fight against impunity, and to prepare a broader movement, which is better capable of resisting against future wars.
Let us all together refuse the dictate of impunity and let us demand justice for the victims of the United States! 19 complainers have initiated the complaint in Brussels, but there are 7000 victims in Iraq. We want to achieve that 7000 people sign the appeal and pay 1 euro for the costs of the process: give a voice to each of the 7000 victims.
What can you do to help us achieve this goal ?
Spread information about the court case against Franks and to counter the lies.
Ask people to sign the appeal.
Try to put the appeal on other internet sites (of to give us a sign)
Like in Belgium, work with the appeal to sign during music festivals and other summer events. Ask artists to sign.
WHO TO ADRESS?
We work in two ways: we address common citizens and personalities.
Common citizens: It’s out ambition against the growing threat of war to develop in the near future a permanent, broad and dynamic peace movement; base committees STOP USA have been founded in various regions and countries. But we need more of those committees. They can inform people and mobilise in schools, enterprises, neighbourhoods and organisations.
Personalities : In every fase of history important intellectuals, artists and other personalities took a stand against the war: Picasso, Sartre, Mohammed Ali… Recently, even in the United States, very famous actors and directors have openly criticised Bush. These positions give lots of people courage.
We ask you to let as many people as possible sign and to give their e-mailadres only to our secretariat email@example.com . By doing so we can keep them up to date. We also ask you to think very seriously about possibilities to ask a personality of your country to sign: a Nobel price winner literature, an international well known artist or a sportsman or –woman,… Maybe you know someone yourself or you can ask someone who knows a personality. Don’t forget to give us the e-mail and/or posting address of these persons so we can inform them. Thank you.
WHAT CAN WE OFFER?
A videoclip (2'30"): to present our action in a short and convincing way. Available in French, English, Spanish and soon Arab.
-to put on internet sites
-to send as a mail (light version)
-to show as publicity at the beginning of a debate or concert
-to draw the attention at a stand: project it on a laptop, a TV or a multimedia projector
The original videotapes from Bagdad: Witnesses of the crimes, accusations, proves … You can watch them on
The legal file: available on our site
Speakers: two medical doctors who have collected the complaints in Bagdad, …
STOP USA INTERNATIONAL
STOP USA Belgium was founded in September 2002 to prepare the mobilisation against the war in Iraq. But STOP USA aims at global war politics of the US, so of course STOP USA doesn’t want to end its activities. First of all there’s the resistance in Irak against American occupation. We support the appeal launched by ANSWER to organise on September 27 an international day of support to the resistance of the people. Moreover the US are launching threats against possible future targets: Iran, Syria, North-Korea, Cuba… More than ever it will be necessary to coordinate all opposition against the global war of the Bush-administration.
In Belgium the coordination STOP USA unites dozens of organisations on an anti-imperialist platform: against all interference in internal affairs of sovereign countries and for support to resistance. If this example works inspiring for you, you can always found a STOP USA committee in your region our country. We are ready to help you and to give you advice.
Also it seems necessary to us to organise on a European level a coordination of all powers, groups, committees and fronts of anti-imperialist inspiration within the peace movement. In that sense a European convention is prepared for the beginning of October in Brussels; STOP USA Belgium will do the practical preparation. If you are willing to take part in this convention, please let us know.
Current action against Franks is a good starting point and an instrument which can be used by committees and groups with various inspiration. It can be of a great use for the development of a such movement, together and on an international scale.
NEWSLETTER N° 2
Thanks in advance to spread this letter widely (there’s also a version in French, Dutch and Spanish). You can download this letter from the website www.stopusa.be . You will receive Newsletter 2 in a few weeks, or sooner if necessary. Until that date all your questions and suggestions are very welcome.
No to impunity! Justice for the victims! No to war!
For STOP USA INTERNATIONAL
Jo Cottenier, Michel Collon
Alijah Gordon (2003): "IN THE TIME OF THE MISHMISH. A Painting in Twenty Parts", BOOK REVIEW by Adib S. Kawar. July 11, 2003
Published in Malaysia, 2002 --- in 111 pages and with 10 pages of photographs, (E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org )
What drove me to write this book review is the personality of the author, her achievements and dedication to the 'Arab and, in particular, the Palestinian cause. Alijah Gordon's interest in the Palestinian cause did not start after her visit to the 'Arab land, but it was the contrary. While in college, back in 1953 Alijah - she was still Shirley Gordon - participated in a debate on the New York TV against the able debater, Abba Eban, who was serving as the permanent ambassador of Israel to the United Nations. Eban was to become Israeli Minister of Foreign Affairs and served in that post for many long years. Of course, Palestine and Zionism was the subject of the debate. Alijah proved to be very convincing; she could face Eban as more than an equal debater, which immediately aroused the Zionist lobbies against her, causing her to lose a scholarship she sorely needed to continue her Ph.D. studies. The debate was watched by the Egyptian Embassy in Washington and eventually was instrumental in her being granted a scholarship by the Egyptian Revolutionary Council to do research in Egypt from October 54 - 56.
Alijah, who lives in Malaysia, is the non-paid working-Trustee of a Malaysian Government-`created Trust to render humanitarian support for the Palestinians, which was created in 1988. Under the Trust, with her as a driving force, Malaysians contribute anything from RM 1-2 million per year. From this fund, they sponsor a few hundred fatherless Palestinian kids living in the Palestinian refugee camps of Lebanon. They also built a prestigious Malaysian-gifted Learning Center in Badawi Camp in North Lebanon. They have sent US$ 63,000 in emergency support to Jenin in the occupied West Bank, in addition to many other contributions in support of Palestinian refugees. Alijah edited a book about the experiences of the Palestinian Refugees in Lebanon: Palestinians Speak. She has a long history as a self-willed human rights fighter and activist supporting the oppressed and freedom fighters.
Alijah, who is now 74 years old and crippled, but still very active and full of life, used to visit refugee camps in Lebanon to extend help and encouragement to the displaced Palestinians in their diaspora, awaiting their return to their homeland Palestine.
Alijah's "In the Time of the Mishmish" was written in 1958, but was only published in 2002 and is sub-titled A Painting in Twenty Parts. When the author of this review asked Alijah whether she was cynical about the Egyptian Free Officer Revolution led by Gamal Abdul Nasser, about which most of the book revolves, she replied: What I meant to convey by the title was that apricots do bloom, but the season is very short and you must "seize the time" (as the Black Panther titled his book). Describing her book, in the introduction entitled: "This is an Egypt I knew," she wrote "The writing was never intended and is without plan, it is only a ridding of myself of what so consumed my consciousness as to make me unready, unable of new perceptions." She portrayed Egypt, as she knew it, the sad and the good sides of it, criticizing the mistakes of the new revolutionary regime that inherited pyramids of problems.
The Egyptian Revolution was ignited by a heritage of thousands of years of foreign colonialism and corruption, which requires generations to be reformed or actually to be pulled out by its deeply entrenched roots, and that reform needed to start with some of Nasser's comrades in arms, themselves. This is what preoccupied Nasser and his honest comrades, to fulfill the aims of the revolution. Nasser was the driving force and the actual leader of the revolution but, for tactical reasons, in the beginning he used General Muhammad Neguib as a figurehead or a façade for the revolution as Naguib was a general, while Nasser was only a colonel. Nasser had all the good intentions, the charisma of a leader and the cleanliness to do the job, but as it is said 'it takes two hands to clap.' Hordes of enemies, both internal and external, those who were far away and those within his own circle faced Nasser and tried to cripple his revolution.
The old colonial powers, France and England, with the newly-created colonial power in formation, the Zionist state, Israel, from the outside and inside, hand in hand with the men of the corrupt old regime and its supporters, the pashas, the effendis, the beyiks, the feudal lords, foreign and local capitalists and the big merchants, all those who lost their privileges in Egypt and in the 'Arab lands, the 'Arab monarchies fearing their turn would soon come, were all conspiring and trying to abort the enfant and much needed revolution.
The new revolution, during the lifetime of Gamal Abdul Nasser, achieved great accomplishments: the nationalization of the Suez Canal, the creation of the United 'Arab Republic, joining Egypt and Syria - during its lifetime the Zionist state did not dare to commit any act of aggression against any 'Arab state -, the ignition and promotion of 'Arab Nationalism, and the creation of self-confidence amongst the 'Arab masses.
In the Time of the Mishmish is an impressionistic work of art, paintings in words, written when she was only in her mid-twenties about her experiences with a totally new and foreign culture; so the few mistakes she 'committed' in the book are excusable, although they could have been corrected before sending it to press.
The reader of Mishmish would certainly realize that Alijah loved Egypt as it was; she loved its Nile, people and history. She was more than honest in her impressionistic paintings of the different sides of life in Egypt, politically, socially and economically. After meeting with and talking to the most prominent and powerful as well as to the poor, the powerless and the ordinary citizens, who were then only subjects, she portrayed the life of the Egyptian fellah, as well as the Coptic minority, the political, economical and social life of Egypt in a constructive manner, although she criticized some of the undemocratic practices of the new revolutionary regime, but as we said its enemies were many; so some mistakes were inevitable.
Zum Archiv 2003