De Israelische Terreur 895

BBC NEWS
French-Israeli spat over comments

Israel's foreign ministry has accused France of unacceptable meddling in its internal affairs over a reported comment by President Nicolas Sarkozy.

He was quoted by Israeli TV calling for Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, who leads a far-right party, to be sacked.

The plea, which has not been confirmed nor denied by officials, was allegedly made during a meeting with Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu last week.

Israeli Arab leaders have accused the foreign minister of anti-Arab racism.

Ahmed Tibi, a member of the Israeli parliament for the United Arab List, welcomed President Sarkozy's comments, saying: "The international community has started to absorb the danger of the fascism" coming from Mr Lieberman.

“ You need to get rid of this man... You need to remove him from this position ”
Attributed to President Nicolas Sarkozy

However, the deputy leader of Mr Lieberman's Yisrael Beiteinu party called the comments "grave and unacceptable".

Mr Lieberman's office said: "If this report is correct then this is an unacceptable interference in internal Israeli affairs."

Mr Netanyahu's office issued a statement saying the PM voiced his "full confidence" in Mr Lieberman during a meeting with ambassadors from European Union countries.

'Privately pragmatic'

Israeli Channel Two reported that President Sarkozy advised Mr Netanyahu to "get rid" of Mr Lieberman during their meeting in Paris.

He also suggested that his predecessor Tzipi Livni be restored to the post, according to the report.

"You need to get rid of this man... You need to remove him from this position," Mr Sarkozy reportedly said, to which Mr Netanyahu replied that "in private [Mr Lieberman] is pragmatic".

Mr Sarkozy then reportedly said France's far-right leader Jean-Marie Le Pen was also a pleasant person in private.

Infrastructure Minister Uzi Landau, who belongs to Yisrael Beiteinu, told Israeli army radio: "It is hard to believe that the leader of a friendly country would express himself in such a way."

"If I was the prime minister, and those statements were made in my presence, I would have banged on the table and protested. That is how a prime minister who preserves his country's dignity should behave."

Avigdor Lieberman has been a controversial figure in Israeli politics and his appointment as foreign minister after the February 2009 election was received with caution internationally.

He is known for a hard-line stance on peace negotiations with the Palestinians and remarks about Israeli Arabs that have been widely seen as racist.

He has also been a staunch defender of Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, where he has a private residence.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/8126437.stm

Published: 2009/06/30 13:06:32 GMT

© BBC MMIX

De Israelische Terreur 894

ISRAEL ATTACKS JUSTICE BOAT; KIDNAPS HUMAN RIGHTS WORKERS; CONFISCATES MEDICINE, TOYS AND OLIVE TREES

Tuesday, 30 June 2009 14:28 Last Updated on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 16:56 Written by Free Gaza Team

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

30 June 2009

For more information contact:

Greta Berlin (English)

tel: +357 99 081 767 / friends@freegaza.org This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Caoimhe Butterly (Arabic/English/Spanish):

tel: +357 99 077 820 / sahara78@hotmail.co.uk This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

www.FreeGaza.org

[23 miles off the coast of Gaza, 15:30pm] - Today Israeli Occupation Forces attacked and boarded the Free Gaza Movement boat, the SPIRIT OF HUMANITY, abducting 21 human rights workers from 11 countries, including Noble laureate Mairead Maguire and former U.S. Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney (see below for a complete list of passengers). The passengers and crew are being forcibly dragged toward Israel.

"This is an outrageous violation of international law against us. Our boat was not in Israeli waters, and we were on a human rights mission to the Gaza Strip," said Cynthia McKinney, a former U.S. Congresswoman and presidential candidate. "President Obama just told Israel to let in humanitarian and reconstruction supplies, and that's exactly what we tried to do. We're asking the international community to demand our release so we can resume our journey."

According to an International Committee of the Red Cross report released yesterday, the Palestinians living in Gaza are "trapped in despair." Thousands of Gazans whose homes were destroyed earlier during Israel's December/January massacre are still without shelter despite pledges of almost $4.5 billion in aid, because Israel refuses to allow cement and other building material into the Gaza Strip. The report also notes that hospitals are struggling to meet the needs of their patients due to Israel's disruption of medical supplies.

"The aid we were carrying is a symbol of hope for the people of Gaza, hope that the sea route would open for them, and they would be able to transport their own materials to begin to reconstruct the schools, hospitals and thousands of homes destroyed during the onslaught of "Cast Lead". Our mission is a gesture to the people of Gaza that we stand by them and that they are not alone" said fellow passenger Mairead Maguire, winner of a Noble Peace Prize for her work in Northern Ireland.

Just before being kidnapped by Israel, Huwaida Arraf, Free Gaza Movement chairperson and delegation co-coordinator on this voyage, stated that: "No one could possibly believe that our small boat constitutes any sort of threat to Israel. We carry medical and reconstruction supplies, and children's toys. Our passengers include a Nobel peace prize laureate and a former U.S. congressperson. Our boat was searched and received a security clearance by Cypriot Port Authorities before we departed, and at no time did we ever approach Israeli waters."

Arraf continued, "Israel's deliberate and premeditated attack on our unarmed boat is a clear violation of international law and we demand our immediate and unconditional release."

###

WHAT YOU CAN DO!

CONTACT the Israeli Ministry of Justice

tel: +972 2646 6666 or +972 2646 6340

fax: +972 2646 6357

CONTACT the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs

tel: +972 2530 3111

fax: +972 2530 3367

CONTACT Mark Regev in the Prime Minister's office at:

tel: +972 5 0620 3264 or +972 2670 5354

mark.regev@it.pmo.gov.il This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

CONTACT the International Committee of the Red Cross to ask for their assistance in establishing the wellbeing of the kidnapped human rights workers and help in securing their immediate release!

Red Cross Israel

tel: +972 3524 5286

fax: +972 3527 0370

tel_aviv.tel@icrc.org This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Red Cross Switzerland:

tel: +41 22 730 3443

fax: +41 22 734 8280

Red Cross USA:

tel: +1 212 599 6021

fax: +1 212 599 6009

###

Kidnapped Passengers from the Spirit of Humanity include:

Khalad Abdelkader, Bahrain

Khalad is an engineer representing the Islamic Charitable Association of Bahrain.

Othman Abufalah, Jordan

Othman is a world-renowned journalist with al-Jazeera TV.

Khaled Al-Shenoo, Bahrain

Khaled is a lecturer with the University of Bahrain.

Mansour Al-Abi, Yemen

Mansour is a cameraman with Al-Jazeera TV.

Fatima Al-Attawi, Bahrain

Fatima is a relief worker and community activist from Bahrain.

Juhaina Alqaed, Bahrain

Juhaina is a journalist & human rights activist.

Huwaida Arraf, US

Huwaida is the Chair of the Free Gaza Movement and delegation co-coordinator for this voyage.

Ishmahil Blagrove, UK

Ishmahil is a Jamaican-born journalist, documentary film maker and founder of the Rice & Peas film production company. His documentaries focus on international struggles for social justice.

Kaltham Ghloom, Bahrain

Kaltham is a community activist.

Derek Graham, Ireland

Derek Graham is an electrician, Free Gaza organizer, and first mate aboard the Spirit of Humanity.

Alex Harrison, UK

Alex is a solidarity worker from Britain. She is traveling to Gaza to do long-term human rights monitoring.

Denis Healey, UK

Denis is Captain of the Spirit of Humanity. This will be his fifth voyage to Gaza.

Fathi Jaouadi, UK

Fathi is a British journalist, Free Gaza organizer, and delegation co-coordinator for this voyage.

Mairead Maguire, Ireland

Mairead is a Nobel laureate and renowned peace activist.

Lubna Masarwa, Palestine/Israel

Lubna is a Palestinian human rights activist and Free Gaza organizer.

Theresa McDermott, Scotland

Theresa is a solidarity worker from Scotland. She is traveling to Gaza to do long-term human rights monitoring.

Cynthia McKinney, US

Cynthia McKinney is an outspoken advocate for human rights and social justice issues, as well as a former U.S. congressperson and presidential candidate.

Adnan Mormesh, UK

Adnan is a solidarity worker from Britain. He is traveling to Gaza to do long-term human rights monitoring.

Adam Qvist, Denmark

Adam is a solidarity worker from Denmark. He is traveling to Gaza to do human rights monitoring.

Adam Shapiro, US

Adam is an American documentary film maker and human rights activist.

Kathy Sheetz, US

Kathy is a nurse and film maker, traveling to Gaza to do human rights monitoring.

###

De Israelische Terreur 893

Ezra Nawi, a Jewish Israeli, helped Palestinians set up an outpost adorned with the Palestinian colors (above) to protest an illegal Israeli settlement. (Photo: Rina Castelnuovo / The New York Times)

It's not easy to get a laugh when you're giving a talk in a church about the Israel-Palestine conflict. But I managed recently. When someone in the audience said he was afraid of being called an anti-Semite if he criticized Israel, I replied, "Oh, I've been called an anti-Semite lots of times, even though I'm Jewish. You just get used to it." That drew a major chuckle from the audience.

But it wasn't really an honest answer. I have been called an anti-Semite in public as well as in private. And it has gotten somewhat less painful over the years. Yet, I've never gotten totally used to it. It's unjustified; it's nasty and it hurts. There's nothing funny about it.

So, it's disingenuous for me to tell others just to get used to it, that it's merely the price you have to pay for speaking your conscience. It is indeed a price you may have to pay. But there are serious issues here that deserve serious consideration.

For those of us who live in the United States, the anti-Semitism slur should recall the dark days of the 1950s, when right-wingers called left-leaning peace activists "un-American." The House Un-American Activities Committee struck fear in the hearts of the left simply by hurling the dreaded epithet, and with good reason. The committee wielded tremendous power because such a big portion of the public supported, or at least tolerated, it. By the end of the 1960s, though, after millions had marched to protest the war in Vietnam precisely because they wanted a better America, the charge of "un-American" sounded like the empty fulminations of a powerless right.

Now, as then, it's ultimately all about power. The "pro-Israel" right aims to use the "anti-Semitic" slur to put critics of Israeli policy in a politically powerless group - the true anti-Semitic fanatics, who have no credibility in the US political arena. The charge of anti-Semitism hurts not only because it is so unfair, but because it is so disempowering. If it sticks, it takes its victims out of any reasonable debate and renders them politically irrelevant. That's precisely why it is hurled so often.

So this slur, like any unjustified slur, is actually an invitation to do political battle, using words as weapons. No battle is without its risks. Yet, rather than shy away from talking about Israel for fear of being called anti-Semitic, peace advocates might want to accept the invitation, for two good reasons. First, they clearly have moral and political truth on their side. The equation "critical of Israel = anti-Semitic" is a propaganda ploy that is used to justify terrible immoralities. And it has no basis in fact.

The proof of that is also the second good reason to join in the political battle. If you accept the invitation, you will have a sizable army of Jewish critics of Israel, past and present, on your side. They are the clearest proof that you can condemn Israeli policies without being anti-Semitic.

In the early days of Zionism, virtually all Orthodox Jews condemned the very idea of a Jewish state. They saw it as a threat to the Jewish life they knew and loved because (as the famous Lubavitcher rebbe said as early as 1903) Zionism was trying to replace religion with nationalism. That view survives today, though only among a very small number of Orthodox anti-Zionists. Right or wrong, it grows out of a deep concern for the best interests of the Jewish people as they see it. It's certainly not anti-Semitic.

From the earliest days of Zionism, there were also Zionists who spoke out against immoral treatment of Palestinian Arabs. The eminent Hebrew essayist Ahad Ha'am went to Palestine in 1892, heard news of Jewish attacks upon Arabs, and protested eloquently. Not only did the violence diminish the moral standing of the Jews, he warned; it was self-defeating. The Arabs knew perfectly well what they stood to lose, and the more they were attacked, the more they would resist.

Since then, thousands of Zionists who followed Ahad Ha'am's lead have formed the moral conscience of the movement. They loved the Jewish people and the best in its tradition; they wanted to make sure that Zionism promoted the best, rather than dragging Jews down to the worst.

For the same reason, thousands of Israeli Jews today criticize their government as harshly as any of its critics here in the US. The kind of criticism that earns charges of anti-Semitism here has always been taken for granted in Israel as a routine part of the political scene. Just read the opinion page of Israel's premier newspaper Ha'aretz almost any day to see how fierce the debate can be. Yet, it's always about differing views on the best way to help the Jewish people, not how to harm them. That's hardly anti-Semitic.

The same debate is now entering the mainstream of the American Jewish community, too. People who have being doing Jewish peace work here for a long time are astonished to find critical views that were once taboo now part of the Jewish conversation here, just as they've always been in Israel.

Here, as there, they certainly incite strong emotions. Indeed the spurious charges of "anti-Semitism" reflect the increasingly shrill hysteria of right-wing Jews. They once had the political field to themselves, but now they're fighting to keep whatever power and influence they have in their community. That's why they approach every discussion of the issue as a pitched battle, using the "anti-Semitism" slur as a favorite weapons. So, in the short run we may hear that slur more often.

But in the long run, like the "un-American" silliness of the 1950s, it will fade away. And the more people speak out against the right-wingers, explaining how peace and reconciliation are in the best interest of Jews as well as Palestinians, the faster it will fade away. Eventually, we are likely to reach the point that many American peace activists reached in the late 60s, when we took the charge of being "anti-American" ironically and learned to laugh about it. So, perhaps there can be something funny in talking about the tragic Middle East conflict, and even the "anti-Semitic" slur, after all.

If you do choose to voice your critical views of Israel, there are two more serious questions to ask yourself. First, might there be a shred of truth in the charge of anti-Semitism? We are all products of a society full of prejudices we are trying to escape. We all harbor feelings we wish we didn't have. But those feelings don't define who we are. Lots of people who criticize Israeli policies may carry some tinge of anti-Semitism that was imprinted in childhood. That doesn't make them anti-Semites.

An "anti-Semite" is someone whose every response to anything any Jew says or does is automatically hateful, just because the person is Jewish. There are some of those people around. But it's not very likely you are one of them. (If you were, you probably wouldn't have read this far.) So, you can learn to distinguish between your prejudices and your legitimate criticisms of other people's behavior, no matter what their ethnicity or religion. It's much easier to make that distinction if you acknowledge all your feelings, even the ones you wish you didn't have.

A second question to ask: Is this the right time and place to voice your criticisms? There are situations in which it just isn't worth the effort, because the result will be painful and there's no chance of the person hurling the "anti-Semite" charge being reached at all by your response. That's a judgment call, which often has to be made on the spur of the moment. Often, it's not easy.

And if you are talking or writing to someone who can't endure criticism of Israel, but might otherwise be open to forming a relationship with you, it might make sense to put off your criticism to a later time. Once the relationship is developed, your new friend might be able to hear you, think about what you say and, perhaps, even change their own mind. So, giving up the satisfaction of speaking your truth for the time being might be the practical way to go.

The point is that sometimes it makes sense to back away from speaking out in the face of the "anti-Semite" charge. It doesn't always mean that you've let yourself be stifled by fear of a nasty epithet.

Most of the time, though, you can feel quite sure that you are serving the best interests of the Jewish people - as well as the Palestinians, the Americans, and everyone else - by saying what you believe, openly and honestly. There's a new air of free debate on this issue among Jews and non-Jews alike, reaching even to the Oval Office. It's likely to spur renewed negotiations between Israel and Palestine, leading to the peace they eventually must and will create. And it's surely going to strengthen democracy. For all those gains, an occasional slur of "anti-Semite" is probably a price worth paying.

Zie: http://www.truthout.org/063009C

Iran 302

Iran: The World Is Watching
Tuesday 30 June 2009
by: Steve Weissman, t r u t h o u t | Perspective

When President Barack Obama warned Iran's ayatollahs that the world was watching their brutal crackdown on peaceful protesters, he touched a sacred chord for a whole generation of American activists. Back in 1968, as TV cameras broadcast dramatic images of Mayor Daley's police cracking heads at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago, anti-war demonstrators famously chanted, "the whole world is watching."

In the eyes of the mass media, of course, not all protests or electile dysfunctions are equal. After 9/11, our free press largely ignored persuasive evidence that Al Gore had won the presidential elections in Florida, while TV cameras gave scant coverage to demonstrations against George W. Bush's invasion of Iraq. But for those in Washington planning regime change in Tehran, the media problem was not how to convince CNN and the BBC to beat the drums for the "Green Revolution."

The problem was far trickier. How would Washington's media mavens help bring a protest to the streets? And how would they guarantee a continuing flow of powerful images and poignant words between the protesters and the watching world?

Their solution took many forms, from TV and radio broadcasting reminiscent of the cold war to the latest in Internet technology, including the widespread use of Twitter and Facebook. Since 2006, the State Department alone spent more than $200 million on the effort. The money went to its in-house Iran bashers and "democracy-promoters," the Voice of America's (VOA) Farsi language broadcasts, Radio Free Europe's round-the-clock Radio Farda and the secretive National Endowment for Democracy, which funded several other groups.

This $200 million came on top of the $400 million that Congress allocated in 2007 for regime change in Iran, some of which went for the CIA's state-supported terrorism inside Iranian borders.

Whether the overthrow of Ahmadinejad succeeds or fails, the Green Revolution will indeed have many fathers, and critics should avoid pointing the finger at only the CIA or its spin-off, the National Endowment for Democracy. Orange, Rose and Green Revolutions in other countries require coordinated US government intervention, aimed at creating what Rutgers journalism professor Jack Bratich has called "genetically modified" grassroots movements.

Nowhere has this been more obvious than in the widely reported use of Twitter, Facebook, and other of the new media's social networking tools. How did these tools come to play such a pivotal role in Iran's "Green Revolution"? In large part because Washington made a huge push to encourage their use as part of its strategy of democracy promotion, which in Iran became full-scale psychological warfare.

Meet Jared Cohen, the young State Department official who asked Twitter not to close down for maintenance during hours that Iran's protesters might need the service. He is not your everyday computer geek, who just happened to know the nice folks at Twitter.

Author of the widely acclaimed "Children of Jihad: A Young American's Travels Among the Youth of the Middle East," Cohen had served as Condoleezza Rice's adviser on youth and technology, especially in the Muslim world. In that role, he worked with Twitter, Facebook, Howcast, Google, MTV, and others in an official campaign to promote online, mobile and digital networking "as a tool for youth empowerment against violence and oppression."

And not just in Iran. Speaking last December on a web chat to publicize the State Department's Alliance of Youth Movements Summit, Cohen talked the talk of the official democracy promoters. "Wherever civil society organizations exist or individuals have causes that promote non-violent youth causes, we want them to have the knowledge and information on how to develop an online component to what they are trying to achieve," he said.

With Cohen as the Alliance's international press contact, the State Department put out an online "field manual" that provided best practices, videos and steps for building these kinds of movements.

Promoting his book in 2007 to The New Yorker, Cohen gave a different impression. The State Department still had him traveling, he said. But now he was plugged into power.

"Basically, I do a safer version of what I used to do," he explained. "Now I'm in a place where I can take what young people are saying to me and work with my colleagues in Operations and in the embassies to do something that actually happens on the ground."

Cohen could not stop talking. "I always say that the largest party in every country - the largest opposition group in every country - is the youth party," he said.

Frankly, I was flabbergasted. Had the spirit of Abbie Hoffman and his Yippies, the Youth International Party, gone from anti-war demonstrations in Chicago to work in the very belly of the beast, all nonviolently, of course, and armed with the newest of new media? No wonder Cohen's boss Condi Rice sounded so ecstatic when she described the Internet as "possibly one of the greatest tools for democratization and individual freedom that we've ever seen."

As Rice well knew, the new media is especially great for meddling in another country, especially when Washington and its allies have so many other psywar tools at their disposal. Take, for example, The Washington Post's recent article "Persian News Network Finds New Life in Contested Iranian Election." The ayatollahs had cracked down on free speech, wrote the Post, and Voice of America was rushing to the rescue.

"What we're seeing is a new level of cyber warfare," said producer Gareth Conway, referring to the Iranian government's blocking of text-messaging services and Internet sites and Iranians' attempts to fight back. "We're trying to give viewers updates on technology, how they can continue to communicate with each other."

"As protests have erupted over the heavily disputed reelection of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, VOA's Persian-language TV network and a similar BBC service have emerged as a critical way for Iranians to share information."

Yes, the whole world is watching, as President Obama suggests. But our supposedly free media show only half of the picture. They give wall-to-wall coverage of the protesters, whose heroism is very real. But the TV cameras and front-page headlines completely ignore how hard Washington worked to stir up the protests, and most of the supposedly progressive blogosphere wears the same political blinders. Old media or new, to a child of the cold war, the self-righteous dupery is déjà vu all over again.
»
A veteran of the Berkeley Free Speech Movement and the New Left monthly Ramparts, Steve Weissman lived for many years in London, working as a magazine writer and television producer. He now lives and works in France.
Zie: http://www.truthout.org/063009J

Ronny Naftaniel van het CIDI 11

Beste Ronny Naftaniel,

Bij deze doe ik een beroep op jou als mens en als directeur van het Centrum Informatie Documentatie Israel (CIDI). Steun Ezra Nawi, een joods-Israeli van Arabische afkomst, een mizrahi, die voor vrede is en daarvoor samenwerkt met de Palestijnse bevolking die zwicht onder de decennialange terreur van de zionistische bezetting. Aangezien jij en je organisatie claimen de informatie en documentatie over Israel te verzorgen, is mijn verzoek nu aan jou: verspreidt informatie over de zaak Ezra Nawi! In afwachting van je antwoord,

vriendelijke groet,

je oude kameraad en journalist,

Stan van Houcke

Ezra Nawi 2

Ezra Nawi is an activist in Ta'ayush, Jewish-Arab Partnership. He is likely
to be sentenced to prison tomorrow--for peacefully resisting settler and
army violence against West Bank Palestinians and the illegal expropriation
of their land.

http://www.supportezra.net/

Israel's Man of Conscience

by Ezra Nawi

The Nation
29 June 2009


My name is Ezra Nawi. I am a Jewish citizen of Israel.

I will be sentenced on the first of July after being found guilty of
assaulting two police officers in 2007 while struggling against the
demolition of a Palestinian house in Um El Hir, located in the southern part
of the West Bank.

Of course the policemen who accused me of assaulting them are lying. Indeed,
lying has become common within the Israeli police force, military and among
the Jewish settlers.

After close to 140,000 letters were sent to Israeli officials in support of
my activities in the occupied West Bank, the Ministry of Justice responded
that I "provoke local residents."

This response reflects the culture of deceit that has taken over all
official discourse relating to the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

After all, was I the one who poisoned and destroyed Palestinian water wells?

Was I the one who beat young Palestinian children?

Read the rest of this story on our website and discover other news
and opinions on Palestine.

http://www.australiansforpalestine.com

RONNY NAFTANIEL, WAAR BEN JE?

In mijn boek De oneindige oorlog staat een interview met Ezra Nawai, een van de mensen aan wie ik het boek heb opgedragen. Hij zegt ondermeer dit:

‘Het Israëlische racisme komt uit Europa. De zionistische beweging heeft het racisme van de Europese nationalistische bewegingen geadopteerd om een koloniale politiek te kunnen voeren. Dit racisme is nu in Israël geïnstitutionaliseerd, terwijl het in het Westen officieel is afgeschaft. Mijn familie kwam uit Irak en moest onmiddellijk na aankomst haar Arabische cultuur afzweren en vervangen door de cultuur die was gevormd door Oost-Europese zionisten, afkomstig uit de sjtetl. Zelfs nu nog hebben de Europese joden onevenredig veel macht. Op de achtergrond speelt de naziholocaust een grote rol, dat trauma wordt gecultiveerd, het is een politieke reflex geworden om onrecht goed te praten. De mensen worden in angst opgevoed en gehouden. Arafat is Hitler, Saddam is Hitler, Ahmadinejad is Hitler, en deze politiek getuigt van weinig respect voor de slachtoffers van de Holocaust, die worden gebruikt als pionnen in een machtsspel. De joden in Israël zijn gevangenen geworden van deze angstfictie. Alles wordt onmiddellijk beoordeeld vanuit het perspectief van de Holocaust, terwijl in werkelijkheid de motivatie van de Israëlische autoriteiten niet bepaald wordt door de wandaden van Hitler maar door de expansionistische belangen van de elite. Hitler is een handig excuus. Dit is geen door God gegeven angst, het is een angst die door mensen is gecreëerd. Het is het product van ons eigen gedrag. Als men beslist om met het zwaard te leven, dan heeft men een goede reden om bang te zijn. Het ligt namelijk voor de hand dat de macht niet eeuwig is, de hele geschiedenis bewijst dat niets duurzaam is. Diep vanbinnen weten de mensen dit, ze handelen er niet naar, maar de angst ervoor leeft wel. Er is intern zo veel verwrongen in Israël.’ Wanneer we koffiedrinken in een restaurant legt Ezra me uit hoe de zionisten de Mizrahi hun achtergrond ontnamen, een proces dat zo grondig was dat de joodse Arabieren zich begonnen te schamen voor hun eigen geschiedenis en cultuur. Sommigen veranderden zelfs hun achternaam. Ze kregen een nieuwe identiteit opgedrongen die het onmogelijk maakte om van hun eigen cultuur, die van origine Arabisch was, te genieten. Hun eigen keuken, de Arabische gerechten zoals hummus, werden ineens gepresenteerd als joods-Israëlisch. De diaspora moest uit de herinnering worden gebannen. Een nieuwe identiteit moest geforceerd worden, gebaseerd op oude mythen. ‘De stichting van de joodse staat was een sprong over eeuwen,’ schreef Ben-Goerion in 1957 trots, ‘en de Onafhankelijkheidsoorlog bracht ons dichter bij de dagen van Jozua… en onze jonge mensen dichterbij… zijn heldendaden dan alle toespraken die op zionistische congressen werden gegeven.’ En wat de joodse cultuur in de diaspora betreft, daarover schreef hij: ‘Het verre verleden is dichterbij dan het recente verleden van tweeduizend jaar.’ Dat ‘recente verleden’ met al zijn talloze culturele hoogtepunten en zijn ontzagwekkende bijdrage aan de cultuur van de mensheid telde niet meer mee, de diaspora was een te verwaarlozen detail geweest in de hele joodse geschiedenis, niet meer dan een zinloos oponthoud. Pas nu de staat Israël was gesticht konden de ‘heldendaden’ van de krijgerkoning Jozua worden voortgezet en de joodse geschiedenis zijn ware loop hervatten. De joodse diaspora in de Arabische wereld kan in deze expansionistische ideologie natuurlijk geen enkele rol spelen. De nieuwe Israëli moest het tegenovergestelde zijn van de -- in zionistische ogen -- zwakke, opportunistische diaspora-jood. Hij moest sterk en standvastig zijn, een onbuigzame krijger die zijn wil aan de omgeving oplegde en zich niet aan banden liet leggen door onvermijdelijke compromissen. Hij moest een in Israël geboren krachtige Sabra zijn, iemand die niet beperkt werd door een minderwaardigheidscomplex, integendeel, hij moest zich zelfs superieur voelen aan de Arabieren wiens land hij wilde. Ezra: ‘Ze hadden een nieuw land, dat moest een nieuwe identiteit hebben en dus moest het Arabische element worden gemarginaliseerd, zowel fysiek als mentaal. En het bindmiddel daarbij werd gevormd door macht, geweld en een gemanipuleerde angst voor de vijand, voor de buitenwereld, zodat de interne samenhang bewaard bleef. Dit moet stoppen, want een dergelijke mentaliteit vreet zichzelf op, het vernietigt zichzelf, dat besef ik maar al te goed. Het probleem is alleen dat als de druk van buitenaf wegvalt we onmiddellijk worden geconfronteerd met onze onderlinge verschillen, en het lijkt erop dat we daar nog banger voor zijn. Kijk, alles in de wereld streeft naar balans, naar harmonie, een punt waarin het bestaan tot rust komt. Israël is een kunstmatig geschapen land dat permanent uit balans is, dat geen proporties kent en daarom gedoemd is ten onder te gaan, net zoals alles in de natuur ten onder gaat wanneer het langere tijd uit balans is geraakt. We zullen aan ons eigen geweld ten onder gaan, ook dat bewijst de geschiedenis. Om heersers te kunnen zijn vergeten de zionisten al die andere heersers die vóór hen het onderspit hebben gedolven. En ondertussen doen ze precies wat de Verenigde Staten hen opdraagt. De toespraak van president Bush in de Knesset ter gelegenheid van het zestigjarige bestaan van Israël was een regelrechte ramp. Hij verwierp de gedachte dat wij met onze gewapende tegenstanders zouden moeten onderhandelen. Dat betekent nog meer agressie dus. Net als Israël is de Verenigde Staten geboren uit koloniaal geweld, uit de massamoord op de indianen, en aan dit geweld is nog steeds geen einde gekomen. De Verenigde Staten kent alleen maar de taal van het geweld. Maar uiteindelijk vernietigt het geweld zichzelf.’

Hajo Meyer 2

Dear all,

Hajo Meyer, one of the few survivors of Auschwitz, has published a new booklet in German. I think the content is very relevant, and therefore I have written an article to make the content available to a wider audience. Maybe you can publish the article on your website?

Best wishes,
Adri Nieuwhof


http://dada.israel.indymedia.org/newswire/display/10931/index.php

Unjust accusations of anti-Semitism demystified in booklet

Recently, Hajo Meyer published a remarkable booklet to counteract the conscious abuse of the terms anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism by the State of Israel and its umbrella organizations. As a consequence, people are reluctant to criticize Israel's behaviour. Israel's violations of international law and the ongoing collective punishment of the people in Gaza should in Meyer's view be criticized, and he is appalled by the incapacity of the European Union to hold Israel to account.

Meyer speaks with a unique voice about how Israel is playing on the justified feelings of guilt about the Holocaust in Europe. Meyer was born in 1924 in Bielefeld, Germany. He was 14 years old, when he fled on his own for the virulent anti-Semitism of the Nazi's to the Netherlands in 1939. In 1944 he was captured by the Gestapo and deported to Auschwitz. He is one of the few survivors of Auschwitz and lives in the Netherlands.

After being an almost powerless victim of anti-Judaism and anti-Semitism for almost two millennia, Jews obtained political and military power with the foundation of Israel in 1948, writes the author. After World War II, the poison of Auschwitz got stuck to accusations of anti-Semitism. In combination with the radical shift in the position of power of Jews accusations of anti-Semitism can be a serious threat for the accused, certainly in Germany. Meyer calls for the utmost restraint in using the expression "anti-Semite".

The industrialized mass murder of the Holocaust took place right in the public eye of the Christian western world. The feelings of guilt are completely justified, remarks Meyer. Israel is playing on the feelings of guilt of the West with the threat of public accusations of anti-Semitism when it is criticized for its acts. The West perceives itself as a friend of Israel, but in reality, by not criticizing Israel's violations of internal law, it allows the country to slide further into a hopeless situation. Real friends should tell each other the truth. Maybe one day, the West has to draw the sad conclusion that after the Holocaust, it was also implicated in the destruction of the Palestinian people.

Many Jews derive an important part of their Jewish identity from an uncritical loyalty to the State of Israel, according to Meyer. Instead of believers in God, many Jews have become believers in Israel. As a consequence criticism of Israel is easily mistaken for criticism of being a Jew, and people who criticize Israel are then unjustly called anti-Semite.

Israel's policies are directed at the realization of the political Zionist ideology, notes Meyer. He observes that the current political Zionism is aiming at controlling a maximum of the Palestinian territory with a minimum number of Palestinians living on it. However, not all Jews support the Zionist ideology. The ultra-orthodox Jewish group "Naturei Karta", the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network and many Jews openly criticize Zionism. This shows that it is not logical to equate anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism. But this is not the only reason. Meyer reminds the reader that Zionism is not only supported by Jews, but also by the Christian fundamentalist in the United States and Europe. They represent a powerful and fanatic group of Zionists.

Meyer mentions another striking fact that shows that the equation between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism is false. Even extreme anti-Semites like the Nazi's supported Zionism. On 1 September 1933 the Nazi government and German Zionists agreed that German Jewish Zionists, unlike other Jews, were allowed to transfer a large part of their wealth to Palestine by buying German machines and industrial products with permission to export them to Palestine.

In his booklet Meyer defines an anti-Semite as someone who is negative about expressions of Jews, either in words or in behaviour. An anti-Zionist is angry and critical about the acts of Israel that are in violation with international law. Jewish anti-Zionists, who criticize Israel's behaviour, cannot be easily branded as anti-Semite. Such an accusation does not sound logical and is in general not true. To use the term ???self-hating Jew??? for Jewish anti-Zionists will not work, because the most important group of self-hating Jews can be found among the pioneers of Zionism, writes Meyer. One of the examples to support his view is a quote from Aaron David Gordon who lived from 1856 until 1922, "[W]e are a parasitic people. We have no roots in the soil, there is no ground beneath our feet. And we are parasites not only in an economic sense, but in spirit, in thought, in poetry, in literature, and in our virtues, our ideals, our higher human aspirations. Every alien movement sweeps us along, every wind in the world carries us. We in ourselves are almost non-existent, so of course we are nothing in the eyes of other people either." Meyer notes that this view of Gordon expresses a hatred that can hardly be met by an extreme anti-Semite.

In the epilogue Meyer writes that he considers Zionism - in every aspect - as a failed ideology. Israel, the product of Zionism, is a deplorable creation that did not bring much happiness to Jews, Palestinians, or to the world.

Adri Nieuwhof is a consultant and human rights advocate.

Hajo Meyer, Judentum, Zionismus, Antizionismus und Antisemitismus: Versuch einer Begriffsbestimmung. Berlin (2009): Frank& Timme GmbH Verlag f??r wissenschaftliche Literatur.


Samora consultancy
www.samora.org
----- ------- End Forwarded Message ------- -----

Samora consultancy
www.samora.org

Voor een lang interview met Hajo Meyer zie ook mijn boek De oneindige oorlog, waarin Meyer, een van de mensen aan wie het boek is opgedragen, het volgende zegt:

'Alleen de teloorgang van de eigen ethiek zal het jodendom vernietigen.

Ik ben opgegroeid in de traditie van het joods humanisme en heb pas op latere leeftijd geleerd dat er twee totaal verschillende soorten jodendom zijn. Allereerst is er het universele humanitaire jodendom van Leviticus 19 vers 33: ‘‘Wanneer er vreemdelingen in uw land wonen, mag u die niet slecht behandelen’’ en vers 34: “Vreemdelingen die bij u wonen hebben dezelfde rechten als een geboren Israëliet.” Het staat er expliciet. Heb dus uw naaste lief, hij is net als u, want ook u was eens een vreemdeling en wel in Egypte. Met andere woorden: het lijden dat u heeft ondergaan moet als les dienen om anderen juist bewust geen leed te berokkenen. Dat is het fundament van dit jodendom, dat al in de 1^e eeuw voor Christus zo mooi is verwoord door rabbi Hillel met de woorden: “Wat jij niet wilt dat jou wordt aangedaan, doe dat ook niet een ander aan – daar komt de hele Thora op neer.” Die wijsheid is universeel, vier eeuwen eerder al had Confucius in China hetzelfde gezegd. Tijdens mijn jeugd in Duitsland werd ons geseculariseerde joden geleerd dat dit de essentie was van het jodendom. En dat heeft een onuitwisbare indruk op me gemaakt. Het is nog steeds een leidraad in mijn leven, zelfs mijn kamptijd heeft dit niet veranderd. Ik heb net een tweede boek geschreven, dat in Duitsland wordt uitgegeven en waarin ik probeer aan te tonen dat de nazi-holocaust een samenloop was van toevallig aanwezige historische krachten en dat we hier dus niet te maken hebben met een absoluut onvermijdelijke gebeurtenis die in de sterren geschreven stond. Daarmee wil ik benadrukken dat de Duitse joden met hun humanistische traditie en hun verlangen te integreren op de goede weg waren. Maar door de gevolgen van de Eerste Wereldoorlog, wat ook al geen onvermijdelijkheid was, is die natuurlijke ontwikkeling gedwarsboomd. Het antwoord op de Holocaust is natuurlijk niet de benepen, slachtofferistische, ultranationalistische, gewelddadige, provinciale politiek van de staat Israël. Het zionisme gaat van een deterministisch wereldbeeld uit, deze ideologie stelt dat het antisemitisme nooit zal verdwijnen, dat het eigen is aan de mensheid, en dat dus alle joden naar Israël moeten emigreren om zich daar in de eigen groep op te sluiten. Het zionisme kijkt op de joden in de diaspora neer, beschouwt ons als vreemdelingen in ons eigen land, of dat nu Nederland is, of de Verenigde Staten, of welk land dan ook. Ondertussen steelt het het grondgebied van de Palestijnen uit naam van alle joden op aarde, ook van degenen die er niet aan denken om naar Israël te emigreren. De zionisten claimen namens ons te spreken, namens ‘het Joodse volk’, maar er bestaat geen Joods volk, dat is een grote mythe, want voor een volk heeft men één land nodig, één taal, één geschiedenis. Al meer dan tweeduizend jaar wonen wij overal in de wereld, spreken alle talen, en het enige wat we tot op zekere hoogte gemeenschappelijk hebben is een socioculturele erfenis. Het zionisme zit met zijn permanent geweld en zijn verdeling van de wereld in joden en niet-joden op een volkomen fout spoor, waaraan het kosmopolitische wereldjodendom vandaag de dag dreigt kapot te gaan. En dat terwijl de joden toch ook het zout der aarde zijn, want wij hebben door onze traditionele leergierigheid en ons universalisme een onevenredig groot aandeel gehad in het gedachtegoed van de mensheid en zeker in dat van het Westen. En dit is meteen ook mijn antwoord op dwazen als Leon de Winter die met het verwijt komen dat mensen zoals ik zich wel bezighouden met Palestina, maar niet met Dafur. Ze gaan voorbij aan het feit dat we niet weten wat voor cultuur er in Dafur precies bestaat, en in Israël wel. De zionisten in Israël zouden het joods humanisme moeten respecteren. Ik word niet goed als ik zelfs erudiete Israëlische hoogleraren met minachting hoor praten over de Palestijnen, die ze Arabieren noemen omdat ze weigeren te erkennen dat deze mensen in Palestina leefden of nog leven. Het is eigenlijk alleen maar vergelijkbaar met het primitieve antisemitisme van iemand als professor dr. Treitschke uit Berlijn, de grote Duitse historicus uit de tweede helft van de 19^e eeuw. Een buitengewoon erudiet man met een enorm charisma, maar behept met een superchauvinisme, hij was een heerschap dat niets van het liberalisme moest weten. Voor hem gold alleen Deutschland, Deutschland über alles. Deze ultranationalist heeft een hele generatie Duitse intellectuelen gevormd die later de kant van de nazi’s koos, en hij is als zodanig de geestelijke wegbereider geweest voor veel academisch gevormde aanhangers van het nationaal-socialisme. Met dezelfde haat, minachting en hetzelfde chauvinisme hoor ik nu ontwikkelde joden praten over de Palestijnse bevolking. En dat kan niet, dat mag niet, dat is verwerpelijk, dat is misdadig.'