Israel Medical Association Defends Torture Doctors and Cuts Ties with Israel's Physicians for Human Rights

df
df
df
df
df

dfdf

df

df

df

df

df

df

df

ddf

df

Israel Medical Association Breaks Links with Israeli Doctors Opposed to Torture

British Doctor Derek Summerfield Threatened with Libel Action by the IMA

Today's Haaretz (10.8.09.) carries a report that the Israeli Medical Association (IMA) has cut all links with the Israeli branch of Physicians for Human Rights. The head of the IMA, Dr Yoram Blachar is also President of the World Medical Association. There have been repeated calls for his removal from this office because of his and the IMA's consistent refusal to address the issue of the participation of Israeli doctors in the torture of Palestinians.

One would have thought that Israeli doctors, conscious of the involvement of Nazi SS doctors like the infamous Dr Josef Mengele in the torture and diabolic experiments on Jewish children and twins, would have been the last body to condone the involvement of medical personnel and doctors in torture. Not so. Instead the primary concern of the IMA has been to defend the doctors involved and rebut allegations of involvement in torture.

For some 14 years IMA, and myself at its head, have served as a defensive barrier between international anti-Israeli bodies and the doctors of the State of Israel, against baseless attacks, according to which, inter alia, the doctors of the State of Israel are allegedly actively involved in the torture of Palestinian prisoners, and/or are accused of allegedly ignoring such phenomena.

As Blachar himself states:

The infuriating reality is that the activities of PHR-Israel constitute fertile ground for anti-Israeli and anti-Zionist anti-Semitism.

This is the only concern of Blachar (& Israel's Supreme Court itself legally permitted the use of 'moderate physical pressure' as a result of the recommendations of the Landau Commission, chaired by former Supreme Court judge Moshe Landau). It is universally acknowledged that torture of Palestinians in Israel is routine (see e.g. the report of Israel's main human rights organisation, Btselem). See all the article (below) from Haaretz 24.6.09. on the systematic use of torture in Israel.

Tony Greenstein

IMA cuts ties with PHR over call for ouster of Israeli head of World Medical Association

By Dan Even
In an unprecedented move, the Israel Medical Association announced this month that it was severing its contacts with the Israeli branch of Physicians for Human Rights.

The decision was made after the president and founder of PHR-Israel, Ruchama Marton, signed an international petition calling for Dr. Yoram Blachar's ouster as president of the World Medical Association. Blachar is also president of the IMA.

But PHR insisted that Marton signed the petition in her individual capacity and not on behalf of the organization. "The organization does not support the dismissal of Dr. Blachar from the presidency of the World Medical Association and calls for professional conduct to be maintained," said PHR's director, Hadas Ziv.

Marton added: "The petition was naturally signed by private individuals and not organizations. I am happy that I signed, but I signed as a private individual."

In his letter to PHR, Blachar wrote: "The damage caused by [your] organization is great. We have pleaded with the organization's administration to refrain from using the international arena to besmirch and sling mud at Israel's doctors, but to no avail. We have decided to cut off all contact with the organization, and I hope you deal with the matter as your conscience dictates."

His announcement sparked harsh criticism from PHR, a nonprofit organization whose members include some 500 Israeli physicians, among them senior doctors. Most PHR volunteers are also members of the IMA, which represents about 95 percent of Israeli doctors.

PHR warned that the decision to sever contact would cause serious damage to the medical system, including by disrupting patient referrals between the clinics for foreign workers and refugees that the IMA and PHR both run in south Tel Aviv.

It also expressed concern about how the rupture would affect exchanges of data regarding patients, including prisoners, who need treatment, and professional cooperation to promote issues such as the elimination of patient copayments for medication.

"The severing of contact is serious," said PHR's Ziv. "We are not interested in taking steps that make the situation worse; we believe in dialogue instead."

Criticism echoed

Several local physicians who volunteer for PHR echoed the organization's criticisms.

The IMA said its exceptional decision was made in light of the cooperation between PHR and Derek Summerfield, a British physician who claims that Blachar has justified torture of prisoners for over 10 years. Summerfield was one of the initiators of the petition to depose Blachar as president of the World Medical Association. To date, the petition has attracted 725 signatories from 43 countries. But the IMA recently circulated a counterpetition in support of Blachar's presidency that has attracted 5,500 signatures.

Blachar's term as IMA head will end in September after three terms in office. His successor as president of the World Medical Association is expected to be elected in October.

PHR recently released a list of 12 physicians who, according to testimony in a report published by the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel, participated in the torture of Palestinians. But IMA ethics committee chairman Prof. Avinoam Reches, who looked into the matter, concluded that there is no evidence linking these physicians to torture.

"I was provided with the names of physicians who denied in every way possible that they engaged in torture in the course of interrogations," Reches said. "The ethics committee has no legal power to investigate the allegations beyond talking [to the doctors]. From the doctors' tone, my impression was that they are telling the truth."

PHR's Ziv said in response that "the Israel Medical Association conducts complex ethics investigations, but in this instance, it avoided a comprehensive examination."

Moreover, PHR members said, the chief physician of the Israel Prison Service is a member of the IMA ethics committee, and that could influence the standard of the IMA's investigation.

Blachar, however, said the IMA "has explicitly stated our opposition to the torture of prisoners and detainees jailed in Israel ever since the High Court of Justice ruling [on the subject] in 1999."

"Dr. Marton is president of Physicians for Human Rights, and her signature is identified with the organization," Blachar added. "If the organization says it will stop its activity in the international arena to defame, slander and sling mud at Israel's doctors, we could reconsider contacts with it."

The IMA's legal department decided last week to file a defamation action against Summerfield, the British physician who was one of the initiators of the petition drive against Blachar.

Letter from Dr Derek Summerfield & 725 Doctors calling on the World Medical Association to Remove Dr Blachar as its President

Dear Dr Hill and WMA Council

Further to our original open letter and subsequent material (we await acknowledgement of receipt), we think you and the Council should see this letter from Dr Blachar as IMA President about Physicians for Human Rights Israel.

We find this so remarkable and outrageous that we have sent it today to Fiona Godlee, Editor of the Brit Med Journal, who have already carried a news item on our call to you. As we say, this must be a first! Where does it place the WMA as a body to have a President resorting to such crude cynicism in seeking to dismiss the evidence base and those who have contributed to it on a matter as grave as torture and doctors' collusion with it.

This is Dr Blachar working hard to defend the utterly indefensible. This is the collusion we are talking about!
As before we would be grateful if you would distribute this to Council members.

We appeal to the WMA Council to take a principled step with the greatest international resonance.

We are anxious to hear from you and are concerned that Dr Blachar may be pressurising you into not responding so that we get ever closer to the end of his tenure in October/November.

Yours sincerely

Dr Derek Summerfield, on behalf of Prof Meyers and 725 sigs.

To doctors who are members of PHR-Israel
21 July 2009:

IMA Chair, Dr. Yoram Blachar, publishes a letter in which he explains to doctors who are members of PHR-Israel, why IMA has decided to sever all contacts with the association.

To doctors who are members of the PHR-Israel association

I appeal to you first of all as Israeli doctors who are members of IMA and additionally as members of PHR-Israel. I want to share with you my hard feelings following recent developments.

For some 14 years IMA, and myself at its head, have served as a defensive barrier between international anti-Israeli bodies and the doctors of the State of Israel, against baseless attacks, according to which, inter alia, the doctors of the State of Israel are allegedly actively involved in the torture of Palestinian prisoners, and/or are accused of allegedly ignoring such phenomena.

These are baseless accusations that are expressed, for instance, in medical journals such as the Lancet, the BMJ and the Journal of the Royal College of Medicine.

Unfortunately, various organizations, and particularly PHR-Israel are contributing to the international offensive against us. For years we have appealed to PHR-Israel to give us the personal details of those who were allegedly involved in torture so that we could relate to each case individually – but we received no such details from PHR-Israel.

On one single occasion, about 13 names were transferred to us, of doctors who were allegedly involved in torture or degradation of Palestinian detainees, by the organization PCATI (Public Committee Against Torture in Israel) and not by PHR-Israel. An investigation into the subject, held by Prof. Reches, the head of IMA's Ethics Board, showed that among the doctors accused, some had never worked in those facilities, and three who had worked there, categorically denied any connection to the accusations. Of course the accusations are "based" on one-sided testimonies with no supporting evidence. By the way, since participation in torture is a criminal offence, the accusers are free to submit a complaint to the police or to the Attorney General.

I would like to state that we are open to criticism and in several meetings that the leadership of IMA held with the Board of PHR-Israel we clarified our position. Nonetheless, we objected strongly to criticism when it was expressed in international fora. Time and again, we begged PHR's Board to avoid using the international arena, blackening names and slinging mud at the doctors of Israel and at IMA, but in vain. The infuriating reality is that the activities of PHR-Israel constitute fertile ground for anti-Israeli and anti-Zionist anti-Semitism.

It would seem that this issue reached a new climax when about one month ago a petition signed by 725 doctors was published, calling for my expulsion from my position as the president of the World Medical Association (WMA). Dr. Ruchama Marton, President of PHR-Israel, also signed this petition!!!

It is important for me to emphasize that in any case I am about to end my role at WMA in October, so that the personal issue is marginal. The issue is much more problematic, and it involves the harnessing of the world medical community to a struggle against us, the doctors in Israel , and against the Israeli medical system, supposedly as part of the regional political system, and by blackening our names and slinging mud at us doctors.

Matters have gone so far, that in one of the discussions held this week in the annual conference of the British Medical Association (BMA) (to which I was invited as president of the WMA), a stormy discussion was held in which very hard and baseless accusations were directed at IMA and the State of Israel. The discussion was polarized and reached a point where the situation in the State of Israel was compared in the same breath to the situation in Darfur and Sri Lanka, states in which, as is known, genocide and blood baths are taking place!

The speakers at the conference stated several times that they had drawn the information that they were basing their claims on from PHR-Israel and that if an organization of Israeli doctors makes such a claim, who are we, the Moslem and anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli doctors, to doubt the credibility of information from PHR-Israel?!!.

What was absurd was that it was our friends at the BMA who prevented the members of the conference from adopting hard resolutions at the end of the discussion, and they were the ones who assisted us in withstanding the rising wave of Israel-haters.

The damage caused by this activity of PHR-Israel against IMA is great and it hurts each of us – it is an expression of a clear position against the medical community in the State of Israel and against the organization that you are members of!

I do not thing that there are differences in our worldview with regard to torture and involvement of doctors [in torture]. In order that there should be no doubt about it, although I feel that in the light of the position we have voiced repeatedly, it is superfluous to emphasize that IMA and myself as its leader are strictly opposed to torture and to degrading treatment of Palestinian or other prisoners and detainees. We demand that a doctor who was witness to torture or to its consequences report it – all according to the international conventions of the WMA of which we are signatories.

The leadership of PHR-Israel directs accusations against us in the international arena in a manner that is very difficult to erase, in the face of growing tendencies of waves of anti-Semitism. I wish to stress that IMA is not a political body and any attempt of PHR-Israel to tie the policies of the government to the policies of IMA is irrelevant.

I deliberated for a long time about whether I should appeal to you, since IMA has always been open to criticism, but from the feelings I get on the ground, I think not all of you are aware of this activity of PHR-Israel and of the damage it is causing to the doctors of the State of Israel and to IMA.

In the light of the above, IMA has decided to sever all ties with PHR-Israel and I hope that you will act in this regard in accordance with your conscience.

Regards,

Dr. Yoram Blachar
Chair, IMA　

Last update - 17:07 24/06/2009
Rights group: IDF, Shin Bet restraint practices tantamount to torture
By Haaretz Service 　

Israeli security forces inflicting 'pain and humiliation' on Palestinian detainees, says group report.

Israel's security services came under fire on Wednesday for its methods of restraining Palestinian prisoners during questioning, which a new report claims are tantamount to torture.

The report by the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel (PCATI) describes "pain and humiliation" suffered by Palestinian detainees at the hands of members of the Israel Defense Forces and Shin Bet security service.

The report, which is based on interviews and investigations into 574 arrests and interrogations over the last year, argues that Israeli organizations, in particular the IDF and the Shin Bet, habitually bind detainees in a painful and humiliating manner, often constituting torture.

In defiance of Israeli law, High Court rulings and international laws and guidelines, detainees in Israel are usually bound in a way that is designed to cause them pain, and not only to prevent them from escaping, the report says.

This binding, the report says, is implemented with the express purpose of punishing detainees, frightening them and illegally extracting information and even confessions. The report claims that a large proportion of those exposed to this practice are Palestinian security prisoners, but this approach has also begun to manifest itself in the treatment of other prisoners.

"It stands to reason that this type of binding is used to dehumanize the Palestinian detainee, who is subject to the mercy of the occupying regime," the report says. "This type of behavior by members of the authorities, as this report demonstrates, can be classified as humiliating at the very least, and in certain cases as abuse and torture, which are prohibited both morally and by law."

The report begins with the committee's mission statement, explaining that the group was established in 1990 "in response to long standing government policy that allowed the systematic use of torture and abuse during Shin Bet interrogations."

"The committee operates to protect the rights of detainees and prisoners and to promote an absolute ban on torture, as is dictated by democracy and moral values, as well as international law," the group declares.

The IDF told Channel 10 TV in response to the report that the military adheres to international law and Israeli law and abides by all the guidelines when it comes to the detention of "terror activists who endanger the security of the state of Israel and the safety of its citizens."

The IDF makes a point to ensure the safety of all detainees from the moment of their capture, the army said, adding that it views with severity any unnecessary harm caused to detainees, and thoroughly investigates all claims of abuse, taking punitive action where necessary.

I have added this comment to the article, as for technical reasons it can't be posted.
TG

Excellent summary Tony. A number of us have been trying to get the BMA (Brit Med Asscn) to make a public response and in particular to answer two questions, amongst others:

1. Will the BMA now press the IMA to investigate properly the PCATI report findings on torture?

2. Should not the BMA investigate thoroughly the allegation that the IMA’s stance as it currently appears contravenes the Tokyo Declaration?

The BMA has proved extremely reluctant (to say the very least). Dr Blachar attended (my understanding is that it was by invitation) the recent annual general meeting (Ann. Repr. Meeting) of the BMA in Liverpool. I hear that he was an honoured guest.

I am pretty much of a newcomer, relatively, to this issue—others have been trying, literally for years, to get the BMA to act.

Recent replies to myself from a BMA representative have included the following:

1st email (which was sent as a standard "universal" reply to many of us)

23 June 09

The BMA has been looking into the issues raised by the recent protests regarding Dr Blachar. It goes without saying that this is an issue that generates very strong feelings, and is riven by claims and counterclaims that are very difficult to substantiate. In our understanding, the main substance of the concerns relate to the role played by Dr Blachar as both President of the Israeli Medical Association and President of the World Medical Association. The argument is that Dr Blachar's term as President of the WMA is compromised by the fact that, under his Presidency, the IMA has been complicit with medical involvement in torture. Although each side in the dispute refuses to accept the credibility of critical external witnesses, Amnesty nonetheless describes routine medical involvement in torture by Israeli interrogators, and the BMA views Amnesty's reports as credible. There is not, however, credible evidence that the IMA has directly supported this. We have in fact been forwarded many items, signed by him over a number of years, sent from the IMA to the Israeli Defence Force pointing out that medical involvement in torture is a violation of international medical ethics. In July 2007, for example, as President of the IMA, Dr Blachar wrote to the head of the Israel Security Agency (ISA), Yuval Diskin, pointing out that doctors employed by the ISA are prohibited from taking part in acts that might be perceived as torture. As President of the WMA Dr Blachar has also supported calls for both sides in the dispute to respect medical neutrality.

Having said this, as is widely known, in a letter to The Lancet in 1997, Dr Blachar refers without criticism to Israeli guidelines permitting the use of 'moderate physical pressure' during interrogation. It has subsequently been accepted that this can amount to torture and/or inhuman or degrading treatment. In 1999 the Israeli High Court ruled such practices illegal. Dr Blachar does not, in his letter, go so far as to condone medical involvement in such interrogation. Nevertheless, Dr Blachar's letter has been heavily cited by his critics as condoning such medical involvement, and it has been clearly seen in some quarters as undermining his authority. As President of the World Medical Association, which explicitly forbids medical involvement in torture, we recognise that this puts him in a difficult position.

Overall, however, and on the basis of imperfect and contested information, although Dr Blachar's position as joint President of the WMA and IMA is a difficult one, in our view he has made authoritative statements as President of both organisations calling on the Israeli Defence Force, and any doctors operating under its remit, to respect international ethical standards.

-----

2nd email - 13 June 09

I think all reasonable people, irrespective of their personal views, recognise the complex nature of this conflict, and the difficulty that it presents to those who wish to approach it constructively and even-handedly. It is, as I said in my earlier email, riven by claims and counterclaims. It is also an area in which critics of each regime use extremely broad brushes. Many of the critics of Dr Blachar, for example, seem to imply that the IMA and the IDF are somehow synonymous - that the IMA must be at least implicitly supporting the IDF. The BMA is clearly British, but we have a complex relationship with the various Governments that compromise the UK, a relationship that is, at times, openly critical and hostile.

If the BMA were to make a public call for Dr Blachar's resignation we would need to do so on the basis of strong evidence, evidence that would, if required, stand up in a court of law. A lot of the evidence is, however, inferential, and, as stated in my earlier email, the BMA does not regard it as appropriate to act in the absence of reasonable proof. The evidence of breaches of human rights and medical neutrality on both sides of this conflict is clear. What is less clear is the extent to which the IMA and therefore, by extension, Dr Blachar, is directly involved. And against that there is the evidence we have seen of the IMA and Dr Blachar protesting on behalf of those at risk from IDF actions.

We will continue to monitor the situation.

[I responded to several of these points - BR]

-------

3rd email - 4 August 09

It is gratifying that there is general agreement on the complexity of this conflict, and the difficulty in identifying objective and politically neutral sources of authority.

Where I think there may be some confusion however is in relation to the nature and scope of the BMA's role. As you know, the BMA is a trade union and professional association for doctors. Its role is to protect and promote the interests of doctors and of the medical profession. It has neither the authority nor the resources to mount investigations into medical involvement in human rights abuses.

Our approach has always been to work with appropriate domestic and international bodies, in order to promote the underlying goals of the Association. Our human rights work, for example, is heavily reliant on the information that we receive from Amnesty. Where we receive unambiguous confirmation from Amnesty in relation to the violation of human rights in health, or in relation to medical professionals, we will make a public call to the countries concerned. This we have done in the past in relation to the conflict between Israel and Palestine. Otherwise the work we undertake depends on discussion and debate and the arts of moral persuasion.

The challenge of some of these issues for a democratic and member-led organisation was clearly in evidence at this year's Annual Representatives' Meeting. There were voices raises that were critical of Israel and by extension Dr Blachar, others were raised in support. In the end, no substantive policy was passed. Despite this, we remain committed to promoting the highest ethical standards in medicine and I can assure you that we will continue to keep a close eye on developments in Israel/Palestine, and to use a variety of channels to make our concerns known.

Dr Brian Robinson

5 Scottish PSC Activists Charged with 'Racially Aggravated Trespass Conduct'

One of the consequences of the Establishment trying to redefine support for the Palestinians and opposition to anti-Zionism as 'anti-Semitism' is that it now lays open political activists to prosecution for 'racism'. We have the irony of those who defend racism and apartheid charging the opponents of both with 'racism'. It is an example of Doublethink. Good is bad, anti-racism is racism. The trial is extremely important because it is an attempt to criminalise anti-Zionism and Palestine solidarity. Below is the press release put out by Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign.

Tony Greenstein

Appeal for support by activists on trial for 'racism'!

An arrest warrant was issued at Friday's court hearing against Sofiah MacLeod, Scottish PSC Secretary currently in Palestine witnessing Israel's racist dispossesion of Palestinians. Sofiah will bring her recent experiences of Israeli state-driven racism when she goes on trial accused of 'racism'. Three of the other four accused will similarly produce evidence from first-hand experience of Israel's programme of ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.

On trial for ‘racially aggravated conduct’ are five Scots who responded to the Palestinian appeal for boycott of Israel. We protested a visit by the Israeli state-sponsored Jerusalem Quartet to the 2008 Edinburgh International Festival. Next appearance in Edinburgh Sherriff Court is on Thursday October 1st, when our lawyers will argue to dismiss the case against us .

The Scottish legal authorities will attempt to prove that shouting 'End the siege of Gaza', and 'Boycott Israel' equals 'racism'. We five will argue that boycott of Israel is a duty while that State violates every canon of international law.

This is a political show-trial, encouraged by the stated positions of the British Government, and is aimed at intimidating Palestine supporters. We shall certainly not be intimdated: last year we saw off some Zionist rascals from SCoJeC (Scottish Council of Jewish Communities) who were unwise enough to claim in print that Scottish PSC is anti-Semitic. They then had to pulp 6,000 copies of a book, Scotland's Jews, in open admission that the claim was without foundation and libellous.

We will show in our defence/attack that

* we are bound to oppose grave Israeli crimes and British Government complicity in those crimes, including political, diplomatic, economic and military support for Israeli Governments
* the nearest domestic political equivalent in Britain to the factions in the Israeli Government is the neo-Nazi British National Party (BNP)
* Israel is an apartheid state as defined in international law
* the Palestinian-inspired BDS campaign is a duty for consistent supporters of human rights, i.e. those who repudiate a racist attitude that Palestinians, Iraqis, Afghans and others have a lesser entitlement that others
* the Jerusalem Quartet are indeed, as we claim, institutionally linked to the Israeli Army and its State, and thus to be boycotted by human rights supporters

Expert witnesses - Palestinians, Israelis and others - will show that the growing support for the Palestinian BDS appeal is justified by

* the history of ethnic cleansing carried out by the Zionist movement and its State from 1948 to the present
* the conscious determination of the Israeli State to continue with further criminal acts of ethnic cleansing
* the failure of the British Government to honour its international legal obligations to opppose Israeli apartheid, specifically the illegal Wall and settlement building

Witnesses who have agreed to give expert evidence or personal testimonies for the defence include:

* Leila Khaled, Palestinian refugee and resistance fighter, Member of Palestinian National Council
* Dr. Ghada Karmi, Palestinian writer and academic
* Omar Barghouti PACBI (Palestinian Academic and Cultural Boycott)
* Dr. Hisham Genayem, Palestinian refugee and surgeon
* Dr. Moshe Machover, Israeli academic and anti-Zionist political activist
* Dr. Michael Kearney, University of York (t.b.c)
* Dr. Keith Hammond, University of Glasgow
* Yael Kahn, Israeli human rights activist
* Marion Woolfson, Hon. President of Scottish PSC
* Liz Elkind, ex-President of the STUC, moved successful report and recommendation for BDS at STUC 2009 Perth Conference
* Tony Greenstein, (JBIG) Jews for Boycotting Israeli Goods
* Rt. Hon. Peter Hain MP, veteran anti-apartheid campaigner in the 70's, Chair of Stop All Racist Tours (awaiting reply)
* Members of the public who witnessed the protest during the performance
* BBC sound technicians who recorded the entire event (awaiting reply)

We are asking supporters to

* send letters of support to campaign@scottishpsc.org.uk
* invite one of the accused to speak and explain the background and aims of the campaign to your trade union, political party branch, mosque, church or campaign group
* turn up outside, and inside, the Court on October 1st and later sessions
* make a donation to the campaign (Judge Horseburgh criticised the Legal Aid board severely for refusal to provide legal aid to one of the accused.)
* boycott everything Israeli, except those Israelis supporting Palestinian human and national rights
* join the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign to help us build this campaign

Scottish Palestine campaigners fight charges of “racial motivation"
Tuesday, 14 April 2009 17:27

Five Palestine supporters arrested last year for disrupting a concert by an Israeli group are due to appear at Edinburgh Sheriff Court on Friday.

The campaigners, all members of the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign (SPSC), stood up during the Aug 29th Edinburgh Festival performance of the Jerusalem Quartet and made statements including “End the Siege of Gaza—Boycott Israel!”

The campaigners were originally charged with Breach of the Peace, and had been due to be tried on March 9th. However, at an Intermediate Diet one week before the trial, the Procurator Fiscal made a motion to desert that case and bring forward new charges that their Israeli boycott protest was “racially motivated”.

Sofia MacLeod, SPSC Secretary, and one of the five accused said,

“Given the absurd nature of a charge clearly designed to criminalise the growing campaign to boycott Apartheid Israel until it respects Palestinian human rights, rather than oppose the new charges, we welcomed the opportunity to highlight that to boycott Israel is the opposite of racist.”

Late last year, the UN General Assembly President, Miguel d’escoto Brockmann, was condemned by pro-Israel groups when he described Israel as “apartheid” and recommended that the UN follow “the lead of a new generation of civil society, who are calling for a similar non-violent campaign [to that used against Apartheid South Africa] of boycott, divestment and sanctions to pressure Israel to end its violations.”

Campaign chair and fellow accused, Mick Napier, said, “The International Court of Justice advised in 2004 that signatories to the Geneva Conventions (including the UK) have an obligation to act to ensure that Israel dismantles its illegal settlements and the Apartheid separation wall that steals yet more Palestinian land.

“With the complete failure by the UK and other governments to fulfill those obligations, Israel feels able to break international law with impunity. The devastating result is what we saw in Gaza earlier this year with a death toll in excess of 1300, including 300 children. If our government won’t act to uphold international law, the responsibility falls on ordinary citizens through our power of protest and boycott.”

Local Jewish writer and journalist, and honorary president of the SPSC, Marion Woolfson, described the latest charges against her fellow campaigners as “ridiculous”.

“It would have been absurd to label Peter Hain and Desmond Tutu etc as racist for pushing the successful boycott of Apartheid South Africa; clearly they were anti-racist. Those who use boycott to pressure Israel are similarly anti-racist.”

Before the concert, Woolfson had called on Edinburgh Festival organisers to rescind the invitation to the Israeli musicians. In a letter to the Queen’s Hall venue, she wrote, “I simply cannot understand why you should have invited the representatives of a country that practices ethnic cleansing and a form of apartheid which even those who have lived in South Africa have said is worse than anything thought up by the former rulers of their country.”

However, Israeli Ambassador to the UK, Ron Prosor condemned the action of the Scottish pro-Palestine group, telling the Jewish Chronicle “We must not give in to the attempts to sabotage the marketing of Israeli art and culture in Britain.”

The Fruit of Hate – Two Israeli Jewish Teenagers Murdered in Attack on Tel Aviv Gay Club

df
df

df

df

df

sd

sd

dfd

A response to the murders at the

Tel Aviv LGBT center

It started first in The Netherlands when Muslims and Arabs were characterised as ‘backward’ by the far-right gay populist, Pim Fortyn, who was assasinated in 2002. Whereas previously fascists and racists were the most homophobic of any section of society (bar the religious) the ‘new racism’ encompassed a coalition with right-wing and pro-imperialist gay rights supporters. The latter in turn, as symbolised by New Labour's gay MPS such as Ben Bradshaw and Chris Bryant, were happy to exchange support for gay-friendly measures in return for uncriticial support for Blair's Wars. It is, of course, easy to portray all Muslims and Arabs as anti-gay on the basis of the despicable and murderous record of Iran and Saudi Arabia on gay issues.

So it was little surprise that Israel’s Propaganda Chiefs have also sought to use the issue of Gay Rights in order to further their demonisation of all things Arab and Muslim. And some who should know better, like Brett Lock of Britain’s Outrage group, whose most prominent member is Peter Tatchell, also made clear their support for Zionism and its attacks on Lebanon and Gaza. Lock in particular was an avid supporter of the International Gay Pride festival in Jerusalem in 2007. They had less to say when instead of a march through Jerusalem they were confined to a stadium because of the vehement reaction of Jerusalem’s large ultra-orthodox Jewish majority!

Gay supporters of imperialism seek their own liberation at the expense of third world peoples. In so doing they deliberately turn a blind eye to the fact that racist, settler-colonial states are not the best supporters of gay rights because you cannot support one form of bigotry whilst disavowing another. As Yossi Sarid, an ex-MK of the liberal Meretz party wrote in Ha'aretz after the murder of the two teenagers in a gay club in Tel Aviv last Saturday 1st August, that:

Our foreign ministry plans to enlist the gay and lesbian community worldwide to expose the persecution of homosexuals led by the ayatollahs and their people. We should hope that this campaign is being undertaken with the blessing of the entire coalition, some of whose members have characterized homosexuals as "deviants who should be put to death."

And therein lies the rub. I can remember my own rabbi father telling me that whatever evil Hitler had done to the Jews, he had got it right when it came to exterminating homosexuals. You don’t need to go to Iran and visit the Ayatollahs or Ahmedinajad to understand that religious Jewish hatred of gays is equally as strong and murderous. Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks is another anti-gay bigot who has refused to countenance gay participation in the Jewish community.

Below is a talk given by Tamara, a gay activist, in Berlin, at a rally called to express its solidarity with the two murdered gay teenagers in Tel Aviv. Below that is an article in Muzzlewatch about how the Israeli consulate sought to portray Jewish Gays as synonymous with Gay Zionists on the San Francisco Gay Parade and how Jewish Gays opposed to Zionism and Homophobia were ostracised and attacked in the Jewish community for expressing their support for the Palestinians. They describe how ‘toleration’ for being gay by Zionists is conditional on full support for Israel’s genocidal policies towards the Palestinians.

In other word: 'If you don't support bigotry and hatred against Arabs and Palestinians you will face it yourselves.' It is to be hoped that gay groups and activists take the path of Tamara and the anti/non-Zionist Jewish Gays in San Francisco rather than the road to swapping bigotry that Brett Lock and Outrage represents.

Tony Greenstein

The following talk was given by Tamara, a queer activist from Tel Aviv, at a demonstration held in Berlin on August 7th, in solidarity with the Lesbian Gay Bi Trans community in Israel, following the mass shooting at the Tel Aviv LGBT youth center, killing two and injuring 15.

Tamara's words at the Berlin demo, attended by some 2000 people, expressly and clearly linked the gun violence let loose at the LGBT center with Israel's militarized hypermasculine gun culture and connected the institutional persecution of queers in Israel with the violent institutional persecution and oppression of other groups and minorities; Palestinians, migrant workers, dissenting protesters. "Homophobia is racism," Tamara said. "Racism is homophobia."For a video of the Berlin demonstration and Tamara's talk,

Rela Mazali

Last Saturday a nightmare came true: we were hunted down. A faceless man went into a room full of youngsters and opened fire. Now 2 of them are dead many wounded. Some teenagers outed on a hospital bed.

When the news of the murder came, it was all too easy for me to picture the scene - I used to spend most of my waking hours in this secluded basement flat in central Tel Aviv, the offices of the Israeli GLBT association, Haaguda, working on Pride and AIDS awareness events.

We felt very safe there. Confidant. We had the of City Tel Aviv on our side, hanging rainbow flags on demand. We had the police doing our bidding instead of detaining and forbidding.

Ok, we had to swallow a few LGBT - phobic jokes from officers, bureaucrats, and commercial sponsors. But we thought it was a small price to pay for ten's of thousands marching in the streets of Tel Aviv, safe and proud, landing courage to countless kids across the country.

The price we paid now isn¹t small. It is immeasurable. The life of 2. the health of 15 , a collective trauma.

I do not feel safe now In Tel Aviv. Our strong hold. Our ghetto. I feel grief stricken and furious and betrayed.

I want to know who was this man in a ski mask dealing death in whose name. Was it a homophobic zealot? A fascist? A crazed family member or even a lover? How can I spot his kind and seek shelter when I recognize danger?

Maybe I should simply watch out for man with machine guns.

But this if far from simple In Israel, where most young men are drafted at 18, many issued a gun. Reserves soldiers ­ the entire able boded male population ­ often take their gun home too. There are guns on the bus, guns in Cafes, guns in restaurants, guns on the trains and the beach. Security guards and police have pistols. Settlers carry fire arms where ever they go.

In fact, there are probably only 3 segments of the population in Israel that are less likely to have access to guns: Work migrants, Palestinians, and ultra religious Jews.

Yesterday the Israeli police accused the LGBTQ communities of prematurely calling the murders a hate crime. Of inciting hate against other minority populations.

I agree with the police- it is too easy to point the finger at the extreme religious parties. Or at immigrants. Better look for the real villains: Better accuse the policemen who on Sunday called the supporters of the evacuated families in east Jerusalem, filthy fagots - When Many of them arrived directly from a memorial demo protesting the murders in Tel Aviv. Better investigate law enforcers calling conscientious objectors stupid dykes while smashing their heads on the pavement. Better be ware of the police arresting and bashing queer activists in Central Tel Aviv on the very same day as the murders, after they have tried to protect refugees and their children from being deported.

Better point the finger at the soldiers who kill peace loving men and youth in none violent demos in Palestine, and round up others in the dead of night.

I accuse them of creating a society of hatred and brute force where no minority is safe.

But it is also too easy to blame the police. The police is only a symptom, a tool of the government and the state. The same government who did nothing when calls for our blood where heard from its benches. The same state thatit’s president, Shimon Peres, objected in 2007 to the Pride parade in Jerusalem in ­ where 3 people where stabbed only 2 years earlier.

Many of us in the Jewish LGBTQ community in Israel believed we would be safe if we will be like everyone else be mothers, solders, consumers. Be poster boys and girls for the only democracy in the middle east. Be a tourist attraction.

We were told that we could be safe if we distance ourselves from any hint of otherness. Because ‘the other’ draws fire.

We are not safe. We are being murdered. And in order to protect our self we should be nothing like everyone else. We should demand they put away the guns they use to shoot us. We should denounce violence and repression of other minorities. We should honor the murdered by remembering ­ Homophobia is Racism. Racism is Homophobia.

See also:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8180069.stm
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2009/08/200982171317900770.html
　
Jewish world to queer Jews: gay is great! Caring about Palestinians is forbidden!

Earlier this summer, Israel launched what can best be described as a queer-washing campaign to promote its more tolerant approach to gay rights over the anti-gay, mean, evil, Iranians and Palestinians. Israel’s right-wing supporters may hate Palestinians but this summer, they just LOVE THE GAYS! It’s one of the more cynical uses of liberal and progressiveissues as both distraction and wedge.

Whether the organizers were aware of being used or not, it’s likely that the push for a strong Jewish LGBT presence at this year¹s San Francisco Gay Pride parade was part of this initiative. Hence the multitude of Israeli flags in the contingent - the Israeli Consulate was all over it.

A group of queer Jews, most of whom work or worship inside the Jewish community, decided to join the contingent but with their own signs which read Pride in Israel when Palestine is Free and Feygele for Free Palestine. They had a rude awakening after the parade, learning that while gay may be great in the mainstream Jewish world, Jews-who-acknowledge-Palestinians-as-humans are expected to stay in the closet.

They write in JVoices:

We, Queer members of the Bay Area Jewish Community and our allies, are deeply saddened by events surrounding the Jews March for Pride contingent in this year’s San Francisco Pride Parade.

We wanted to march with ‘Jews March for Pride’ because we are proud to be Queer Jews and allies. We felt excited and privileged to have a place in the San Francisco Pride Parade to celebrate our whole selves as Jews and Queers.

However, our sense of pride in the contingent was shattered when we learned that not only would the Israeli Consulate be marching with Israeli flags, but also that ‘inclusion monitors’ would censor anything that deviated from the narrow message of ‘Jews support LGBT equality.’ We see this as a contradiction. Support for the Israeli government is a political position that is not synonymous with support for LGBT equality, and is not synonymous with Judaism. Because these strong Israeli symbols would be dominating the contingent, we felt we could not in good conscious march without publically repudiating those messages. And although the planners reached out to include us, we felt excluded when any disagreement we voiced was declared ‘off-message’ and inappropriate.

Not surprising. However, they were allowed to march in the parade (Yay!) Here's the boo part:

But the real consequences of our action have occurred in the days and weeks following the parade. Many of us have faced social sanctions in our personal and professional lives. Those of us who work in Jewish organizations have been harshly shamed in our workplaces and our political views have become a topic of discussion amongst our peers and supervisors. We feel vulnerable in the very community that had supposedly organized to support us as Queer Jews.

I know at least one of these stories and it's a real whopper. If and as soon as they decide to make it public, we'll let you know. Suffice it to say, the battle within the Jewish institutional world over the ability to simply think for oneself in terms of Israel and Palestinians is at times medieval.

Join their Facebook group here

Cecilie Surasky

Jewish Peace News editors:

Joel Beinin

Racheli Gai

Rela Mazali

Sarah Anne Minkin

Judith Norman

Lincoln Z. Shlensky

Rebecca Vilkomerson

Alistair Welchman

Jewish Peace News archive and blog:

August 6th, 1945: The Day the U.S. Government Commited the Worst Atrocity in the History of Mankind

When we speak of Genocide we often forget the victims of Hiroshima and Nagasaki who were the victims of unforgiveable mass murder. And why were they slaughtered? Because the United States feared that unless they secured a quick victory over the Japanese the Soviet Union would demand a share of the spoils and political influence.

Tony Greenstein

On this day, August 6th,1945, the U.S. government murdered over 140,000 innocent human beings in the blink of an eye when they dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima. Three days later, the human beings which run our government, and the little men who "were just doing their jobs", murdered another 74,000 innocent human beings when they A-bombed Nagasaki as well. Mass murder in an instant, mass cancer, deformities, and sickness for decades to come.Let us never forget the worst atrocity in the history of mankind, and let us understand the sickness of the "Little Men" who ordered and carried out the killings, so that it should never happen again.

You had the happiness of humanity in your hands, and you have gambled it away. You had the world in your hands, and at the end you dropped your atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Through the centuries, you will shed blood where life should be protected, and will believe that you achieve freedom with the help of the hangman; thus you will find yourself again and again in the same morass.

You yourself create all your misery, hour after hour, day after day. You think the end justifies the means. You are wrong: The end is in the means by which you achieve it. Every step of today is your life of tomorrow. You stand on your head and you believe yourself dancing into the realm of freedom."
You could have long since become the master of your existence, if only your thinking were in the direction of truth...

Wilhelm Reich, Listen Little Man.
First published here, 　

This photograph shows an eyeball of an A-bomb victim who got an atomic bomb cataract. There is opacity near the center of the eyeball.

Arafat - Murdered by Mazen?

You don’t have to be a conspiracy theorist, to suspect that the death of Yassir Arafat was anything but accidental. There is and has been a strong belief that he was murdered by poison and that the mass murderer and arch war-criminal Ariel Sharon was integrally involved in the deed.

What hasn’t been suspected up till now was that Mahmoud Abbas, the quisling head of the Palestinian Authority, was also involved in the plot. But this is the allegation made by Farouq Qaddoumi, the PLO’s second-in-command and de-facto Foreign Minister under Arafat. Qaddoumi has provided a transcript which shows the involvement of Abbas and his security henchman Dahlan. Whether the allegations are true or not is impossible to discern, but coming from Qaddoumi it is clear that these are extremely credible charges.

Yet despite the explosive nature of these allegations, they have been given virtually no publicity, other than by Al Jazeera, which promptly got itself banned for 3 days by the PA in the West Bank.

But although the allegations are difficulty to prove there is no reason to believe that they are false. After all Mahmoud Abbas, chief of the Quisling PA, spent most of the time during the attack on Gaza condemning Hamas whilst ‘understanding’ Israel’s plight. In reality both him and the Egyptian dictator Mubarak were privy to Israel’s attack beforehand and they made it clear that though they couldn’t openly support it they wouldn’t lose any sleep if Israel did what it did.

And why murder Arafat? Was he too not someone who had given Israel most of it wanted at Oslo, not least the hideous creature that the Palestinian Authority has become? There is no doubt that Arafat was corrupt and dictatorial, setting up a number of different private militias as a result of Oslo and policing the Palestinians on Israel’s behalf. But the key difference between him and Mazen was that Arafat, for all his faults, and they were many, still retained his independence. He was still able to say ‘no’ to the Zionists.

Abu Mazen by contrast is putty in the hands of Netanyahu. Benjamin only has to cough and Mazen sinks to his knees. When given an order by the Israeli military or the CIA, Abu Mazen has but one response, which is to ask how they would like it to be carried out. Mazen has been in ‘negotiations’ with Israel for an eternity, he has even secured promises such as an end to the checkpoints or at least their reduction, he has been been promised prisoner releases, but he has secured nothing. And when, occasionally, a crust of bread is tossed his way, Mazen wags his tail in gratitude to the Zionists.

These days the United States effectively controls the Palestinian Authority security forces, with Israel being given a veto. The result is that the guns of the PA are directed at other Palestinians not the cause of their plight, the Zionists. It therefore comes as little surprise to find that Mazen was in on the murder of Arafat too.

Tony Greenstein

New Details on the Alleged Plot to Kill Arafat - Toufic Haddad

A senior ranking figure in the main Palestinian political party Fateh has just made a series of powerful allegations against the current head of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen), and his former strongman, Mahmoud Dahlan, a former head of the Preventative Security services in Gaza.

Farouq al Qaddoumi, the current Secretary General of Fateh’s Central Committee held a press conference in Amman, Jordan on July 12, in which he disclosed information that constitutes a “heavy duty hydrogen bombshell” - to use his words - on the legitimacy of the current Palestinian leadership.

Holding up three typeset pages in Arabic, Qaddoumi claimed he had the minutes of a secret meeting between Abu Mazen, Mahmoud Dahlan, former Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon, former Israeli defense minister Shaul Mofaz, and an American delegation led by William Burns, then a State Department envoy. The meeting was presumably held in the run up to the June 4, 2003 Aqaba Summit where the Israeli and Palestinian sides declared their commitment to the Quartet-sponsored Road Map.

The document essentially recounts that Abu Mazen and Dahlan were privy to Israeli intentions to assassinate Arafat through poisoning. The need to get rid of Arafat and other Palestinian resistance figures is described as a means to facilitate an internal putsch within the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Fateh so that a new class of leaders led by Abu Mazen and Dahlan, could take control. After the second Intifada began, large sections of the international community and the Israeli leadership looked to Abu Mazen and Dahlan as more compliant figures, in contrast to the more mercurial Arafat.

Qaddoumi claims the minutes were entrusted to him by Arafat before his death, though he did not disclose how he received them or how Arafat supposedly got them in the first place. Despite being a founder of the modern PLO, Qaddoumi refused to return to the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) after the 1993 Oslo Accords as many did in the PLO leadership, due to his opposition to the agreements. He is considered a thorn in the side of the current leadership of the PA because his high-ranking, yet oppositional Fateh stripes, gets him press time, and is less easily brushed aside. His local influence is nonetheless limited due to his non-presence in the OPT.

A little context is in order to understand the content of the meeting minutes, whose exclusively English language transcript is provided below.

At the time, the second Palestinian uprising had been going on for more than two years, and Israel had invaded the areas controlled by the PA in an attempt to liquidate the popular resistance there. Israel had surrounded Arafat’s headquarters (the Moqata’a) seeing him as a crucial factor in the national movement’s continued resistance and morale. Arafat had refused repeated Israeli and U.S. demands to crack down on the uprising himself. Furthermore the Palestinian leader’s defiant stance in the Camp David negotiations, where Arafat failed to sign on to U.S. and Israeli conditions for a peace deal which did not fulfill Palestinian national rights according to relevant U.N. resolutions, made him obsolete as far as U.S. and Israeli interests were concerned.

There were also increasing signs that Fateh as a party was unraveling. The Israeli invasions into Palestinian cities brought about heavy pressure for “reform” of the PA, both internationally as well as from within the Palestinian political arena, including Fateh, which held the majority of key positions in the government. Political, generational, and experiential differences divided the party, and an alliance appeared to take shape between Israeli, American and E.U. interests on the one hand, and Fateh reformers on the other, to sideline Arafat and his stalwarts within the government.

Under heavy pressure, Arafat was forced to create the position of Prime Minister in February 2003, as a form of power sharing, with Abu Mazen designated by the U.S. and Israel as the only viable candidate. Arafat saw this as a way he could buy time from what was his own political cornering, besieged in his headquarters and isolated by the West. Arafat would eventually apply pressure back on Abu Mazen in September 2003, rallying Fateh around him not to take Abu Mazen’s orders and ensuring the security services were under his influence. Abu Mazen took the hint and subsequently resigned both as Prime Minister and as head of Fateh’s Central Committee.

It is difficult to determine the authenticity of Qaddoumi’s allegations, though there is widespread belief in the Palestinian political arena that Arafat indeed was assassinated by poisoning when he died in November 2004.

The causes of Arafat’s sudden and mysterious illness have yet to be fully disclosed either by his family or the Palestinian political leadership. Presumptions of assassination have been raised before by figures like Arafat’s personal doctor, and other historic Palestinian figures like Bassam Abu Sharif, who personally warned Arafat of this potential. Qaddoumi claims that Abu Mazen refused to have an autopsy performed on Arafat to know the cause or type of the poison, and prevented an internal investigation within Fateh to try and root out conspirators.

The release of Qaddoumi’s document now appears to be not entirely random. Fateh is embroiled in internal discussions as it tries to convene its Sixth Conference - the major policy and leadership-setting convention of the party. Debates over when and where the convention will be held have hamstrung the party as internal conflict over power, leadership and direction appear to be ripping the party apart. This will be the first Fateh conference held in more than 21 years, a fact that has meant that two generations of party activists have been prevented from exercising real leadership.

Qaddoumi claimed he held onto the documents until now for an assortment of reasons to do with the inappropriateness of previous political moments.

The Executive Committee of the PLO has already responded by calling Qaddoumi’s allegations “nothing but the fabrications of a sick imagination of a leader who has lost all components of political and personal balance.” Abbas Zaki, a member of the Central Committee of the PLO in Lebanon said on Wednesday that the Central Committee will hold an emergency session to assess Qaddoumi’s allegations.

In any respect, the transcript reads like a couple of pages from the script of a Godfather movie, and are indeed shocking if proved true. Irrespective of what comes of the allegations or any investigation into them, the affair shows the extent to which the principle Palestinian political party, which has led the national movement for the past 40 plus years, is so deeply divided that it appears to be imploding on camera.

TRANSCRIPT translated by Toufic Haddad
Sharon: I insisted on this meeting before the [Aqaba] Summit so we can finalize all security matters and put the final touches so as not to encounter any confusion or discrepancies in the future.

Dahlan: If you didn’t ask for this meeting, I would have.

Sharon: To begin with, work must begin on killing all the military and political leaders of Hamas, the [Islamic] Jihad, the Popular Front [for the Liberation of Palestine - PFLP] so as to bring about chaos in their ranks, and to allow you to pounce on them easily.

Abu Mazen: In this way, we will inevitably fail. We won’t be able to get rid of them or confront them. Sharon: So then, what’s your plan?

Dahlan: We told you our plan and informed you of it. And to the Americans [the plans were sent] in writing. We need firstly to have a period of quiet so we can wrest control over all the [Palestinian] security services and all the institutions [of the Palestinian Authority].

Sharon: As long as Arafat is around in the Moqata’ [the Palestinian Authority headquarters] in Ramallah, you will certainly fail. This fox [Arafat] will surprise you as he did in the past. Because he knows what you intend to do. And he will work towards your failure and put inevitable obstacles. He’ll proclaim, as the [Palestinian] street does, that you are being used to do the dirty work of the era.

Dahlan: We’ll see who uses the other.

Sharon: The first step needs to be to kill Arafat by poisoning. I don’t want him exiled, except if there are guarantees from the concerned states that he will be under house arrest. Otherwise Arafat will return to living on a plane [a reference to Arafat's frequent travels before his return to the OPT to drum up support for the Palestinian position internationally.]

Abu Mazen: If Arafat dies before we are able to have control on the ground and all the institutions, and over Fateh, and [Fateh's armed wing] the Al Aqsa Martyr Brigades, then we will face great complications.

Sharon: On the contrary, you won’t control anything as long as Arafat is alive.

Abu Mazen: The plan needs to be where we pass everything through Arafat. This will be more successful for us and for you. During the period of clashing with Palestinian organizations and the assassination of its leadership and its member - these matters will bring with them consequences for Arafat himself. And he can’t say to the people that this is the work of Abu Mazen. But it is the work of the head of the PA. For I know Arafat well. He doesn’t accept to be on the margins. He needs to be the leader, even if he has lost all his options, and when he has no option but civil war. He prefers to be the leader.

Sharon: You used to say before Camp David that Arafat is the last to know and [then] Barak, Clinton and Tenet were surprised that he is the decider [i.e that Arafat feigned ignorance, but knew what was going on all along, engineering it as such.] Perhaps you do not learn from the past.

Dahlan: We have now gone about creating a [security] apparatus composed of the police and the Preventative Security [force (PS)- a wing of the PA security agencies created to prevent Palestinian attacks against Israel], numbering 1800 persons. This combination [is done] so that we are able to integrate those you nominated [to be included in the apparatus] on the basis that each party of the police and the PS, will believe that the members are from the other [security] apparatus. We can increase [personnel] where we want. We are now putting all the officers from all the agencies before difficult choices. We’ll squeeze them by all means so they follow us. And we will work to isolate all the officers who will be an obstacle for us. And we will not wait. We have started to work intensely. And we put the most dangerous figures from Hamas and the Jihad and the Al Aqsa Martyr Brigades beneath surveillance. So that if you were to now ask me the most dangerous five [of them], I would be able to tell you their location with precision. This facilitates your quick response for any activity that takes place against you. We are now working on penetrating the Palestinian organizations, forcefully, so in the coming period we will be able to dismember and liquidate them.

Sharon: You will find me supportive of you from the skies above for the targets that are difficult for you [a reference to Israel's aerial-borne assassinations.] But I fear that Arafat has penetrated you, and has leaked your plans to Hamas, the [Islamic] Jihad [party] and others.

Dahlan: This apparatus has no relation to Arafat - not from near, nor from far. With the exception that the followers of each apparatus get their wages from the Ministry of Finance. We were able to deduct for the apparatus a specific budget to be able to cover all the expenses. And Arafat is loosing control. We won’t let him be in this period.

Sharon: We need to make it easier for you to liquidate the leaders of Hamas by way of creating a problem from the get go, so we can kill all the military and political leaders. In so doing we will open the way for you to take control on the ground.

Abu Mazen: In this way we will fail entirely, and we will not be able to accomplish anything from the plan. Rather the situation will explode without control over it. The American Delegation: We see Dahlan’s plan is good. And we need to give them a period of quiet so as to achieve full control. And you need to withdraw for them from some of the areas to allow the Palestinian police to take over security. And if any [military] operation takes place, you return and you reoccupy the area harshly. So the people feel that those [who undertook the military operation] are a disaster upon them, and that they are the ones who force the Israeli army to return from the areas from which they have departed.

Sharon: Abu Mazen himself used to advise us that we shouldn’t withdraw before liquidating the infrastructure of terror. He needn’t be rewarded.

Abu Mazen: Yes I advised you of that but you did not succeed in that until now. I thought that you would succeed with this fast.

Dahlan: The levers of success are in our hands. Arafat has begun to loose control over matters bit by bit. And we have begun to take control over institutions more than in the past in addition to the joint security force from the PS and the police. It is under Colonel Hamdi Al Rifi. You know him well. And we sent you all the documents concerning these matters, in detail. What’s important here is that this force does not submit to Arafat, and takes no orders from him. And we will begin our work in the north of the Gaza strip as a beginning. As for the Al Aqsa Brigades, soon it will be like an open book before us. We have put in place a plan so that they will have a singular leader, and all those who impede us will be liquidated.

Sharon: I agree to this plan. And so that it quickly succeeds, and doesn’t take a long time, there is a need to kill the most important political leaders who are next to the military leaders. Like [Abdel Aziz al] Rantisi [Hamas political leader, assassinated in April 17, 2004], and Abdallah Shami [political leader of the Islamic Jihad, Gaza, still living], [Mahmoud] Zahhar [current top leader of Hamas in Gaza], and [Ismail] Abu Shanab [Hamas leader Gaza, assassinated August 21, 2003] and [Ismail] Haniyeh [current head of Hamas, elected Prime Minister in Jan. 2006, Gaza], Majdalawi [head of the PFLP, Gaza, still living] Mohammed Al Hindi [political leader of Islamic Jihad, Gaza - still living], Nafez Azzam [Islamic Jihad leader, Gaza, still living.]

Abu Mazen: This will detonate the situation, and will make us loose control over the whole situation. We need to start to work for a ceasefire, so we can control the situation on the ground. This will be more successful for you and for us.

Dahlan: Without a doubt, there is need for your support of us in the field. I support the killing of Rantisi and Abdalla al Shami because those, if killed, will create confusion and a large vacuum in the ranks of Hamas and the Islamic Jihad. Because they are the operational leadership.

Sharon: Now you have begun to get it Dahlan.

Dahlan: But not now. It’s necessary for you to withdraw for us from large parts of Gaza so we can have the large excuse, before the people. And when Hamas and the Islamic Jihad violates the ceasefire, you can kill them.

Sharon: And if they don’t violate the ceasefire? Are you going to leave them to organize and prepare operations against us so that we will be surprised that this ceasefire worked against us…?

Dahlan: They can’t be patient during a ceasefire while their organizations are fragmenting. There upon, they will break the ceasefire. After that will be the chance to go after them. Then it’s your grace, Sharon. The American Delegation: This is a reasonable and logical solution.

Sharon: I will not forget when you used to say to the [Israeli] Labor party and even to us that you are under control of everything, and the reality proved the opposite. Allow me to guide the way, my own special way.

Abu Mazen: The first condition in the Road Map stipulates that you undertake steps supportive of us in confronting terror. We see that the best support you can give us is to give us a part of the Gaza Strip so that we will be able exercise control over it. And we told you that we will not accept any authority other than the [Palestinian] Authority to be present on the land.

Sharon: We told you more than once that supportive steps means that we will support you in fighting terror…either by planes and tanks.

Abu Mazen: That will not be supportive of us.

Arafat Assassination Allegations: The Plot Thickens

July 21, 2009 Toufic Haddad

The scandal surrounding allegations made by Farouq al Qaddoumi against the Palestinian Authority (PA) leadership continues to make waves across the Palestinian political landscape.

Qaddoumi heads the PLO politburo and Fateh's Central Committee. Last week he released a document that implicated current PA president Abu Mazen and his henchman Mohammed Dahlan in Israeli intentions to poison former PA president Yasser Arafat. The damning allegations were a frontal attack on the legitimacy of Abu Mazen and Dahlan, who remains a powerful, albeit controversial figure in its backrooms, despite not currently holding any
governmental position. Qaddoumi¹s allegations have weight to them because he is one of the last remaining, heavy-hitting Palestinian revolutionary figures from the era when the PLO was established, and one of a handful of surviving founders of Fateh. The allegations also cast a shadow over the upcoming August 4 Fateh Conference to be held in Bethlehem, raising
questions about the extent to which the matter will genuinely be investigated internally, and if needed, whether Abu Mazen and Dahlan will be held accountable by the party¹s base.

It is first necessary to update developments in this case to see where things have been heading.

The pan-Arab satellite channel Al Jazeera conducted a live interview with Qaddoumi on July 16 in which he reiterated that the document he presented was indeed genuine. Qaddoumi claimed he had hoped to release the document at the upcoming Fateh Conference but was forced to release it now because Abu Mazen decided - in an illegitimate and unilateral manner, according to Qaddoumi - to hold the conference in the West Bank. Qaddoumi argues that this essentially prevents members from Fateh who live outside of Palestine from participating in the conference. Elements of the diasporic Palestinian leadership, including Qaddoumi, refused to return to Palestine in 1993 after the signing of the Oslo Accords, because they fundamentally disagreed with them. Qaddoumi also objects to holding the conference in areas where Israeli occupation troops essentially do as they please - entering and arresting who they want - though nominally Bethlehem is under PA control. The concern over holding the conference in Bethlehem extends beyond Qaddoumi though, as elements of the movement are still wanted by Israel and fear arrest if the conference is actually held there. Rumors have circulated that Abu Mazen is
extending invitations and using his influence with Israel to have his loyalists who reside outside Palestine, return for the conference, as a means to consolidate his supporting camp within the party.

A couple of other pieces of information have also been thrown into the mix.

Qaddoumi still refuses to reveal how he obtained the minutes of the secret meeting in which the plan to poison Arafat was supposedly hatched. But he does claim to have spoken to Arafat about it, confirming receipt of the document. Qaddoumi apparently tried to convince Arafat to leave the country, but the latter insisted on dying like a martyr without turning back on his beliefs.

Other Arabic news sources are reporting separate interviews with Qaddoumi in which the latter has threatened to release more information, saying,

Now I say to them [the Fateh Executive Committee and the Central Committee, who have harshly criticized Qaddoumi for airing the document:] what would be your response if I released an audio recording in the voice of President Arafat based upon his [posthumous] request, in which he says the same things that I have said?

Qaddoumi has yet to release any new evidence. But if he indeed has an audio recording of Arafat, it would certainly raise the stakes for all concerned, adding weight to his allegations, which by nature are difficult to substantiate. Rather than clarify matters, Qaddoumi's allegations have
tended to throw up a lot of other questions surrounding how he got the meeting minutes in the first place, why he waited so long to release them, and what he intends to get out of the whole affair.

In this regard, Qaddoumi's allegations appear to re-enforce pre-existing divisions in the Palestinian political theater, with PA stalwarts defending Abu Mazen, and the political opposition, primarily Hamas, believing they have credence.

Inside Fateh - where it really matters - the picture is murkier. Five branches of the Al Aqsa Martyr Brigades, Fateh's armed wing in the West Bank and Gaza, released a joint statement on July 18 in which they pledge allegiance to Qaddoumi and support maneuvers to remove Abu Mazen and Dahlan from the leadership of the party and the PA. But the party's main organs
remain in the hands of Abu Mazen, who has used them to paint Qaddoumi as a senile relic of a bygone era. The PA leadership has also been supported by more independent figures who defend the innocence of the current Palestinian leadership.

Mahmoud Damra, one of Arafat's personal body guards during his besiegement in the Muqata'a and currently a prisoner in Israel, and Arafat's former political adviser Bassam Abu Sharif, have both rejected the claim that Abu Mazen had anything to do with Arafat's death.

Abu Sharif suggested the intriguing theory that Arafat was indeed poisoned, but the work was all Israel's. He claims that Israel knew Arafat was taking medication at the time and at one point stopped an ambulance headed to deliver his serum. After briefly detaining the ambulance staff, Israel replaced Arafat¹s authentic medication with one that contained poison, eventually leading to its ingestion by the leader and his eventual death. Abu Sharif has referenced similar Israeli assassination methods in the past, including the killing of the legendary Palestinian guerrilla figure Wadi Haddad in Iraq in the 1977 with a box of poisoned Belgian chocolates, passed
through an Israeli collaborator. The poison resulted in a degenerative blood illness, which eventually killed Haddad in similar mysterious circumstances. There is also the well-known case of how the Israeli Mossad tried to use poison to kill Hamas chief Khaled Mishal in Jordan in 1997. Mishal survived the assassination only because the Israeli operatives were embarrassingly
caught, and Israel was forced to provide an antidote in exchange for their release.

The volley of PA counter attacks against Qaddoumi has been incessant. Al Jazeera reports that Abu Mazen is preparing to gather the existing members of the PLO Executive Committee to remove Qaddoumi from his post in the PLO. Further preparations are underway to use the convening of Fateh¹s conference to remove him from Fateh¹s Central Committee. There are even reports that the PA pressured Jordan to expel Qaddoumi from the country, to Syria.

The PA also ordered Al Jazeera closed for three days for publicizing the Qaddoumi affair, though it was by no means the only television station to do so. It seems that Abu Mazen wished to send Al Jazeera a message not to use its broad and powerful reach to sway opinion in the run up to the
conference, while also sending a forceful message to local Palestinian media, not to investigate and report on the affair. Most local media (besides those associated with Hamas) have toed the line, resulting in much of the Arabic media discussion on the matter deriving from outside the
borders of territorial Palestine.

Indeed Abu Mazen, together with his Prime Minister Salam Fayyad (a former World Bank and IMF official) are trying to run a tight ship in the West Bank, cracking down on any buds of dissent to their control over the territory. They are aided in their task by a new PA crack force trained in Jordan under U.S. General Keith Dayton. Each member is vetted by Israel to make sure they have a 'clean' resumé. Hamas claims that more than 1100 of its members are currently held in PA detention facilities - about a tenth the number of prisoners held in Israeli jails.

The content of Qaddoumi's document is indeed difficult to verify. Many of the basic elements of the document are not in fact new: we know the PA leadership meets on high levels to discuss 'security matters', and that this issue became of primary importance to the Palestinian leadership after the Intifada began, and especially since Hamas took control over Gaza in June
2007. 'Security' is a euphemism for the PA monitoring Palestinian political factions and ensuring that no militant activity takes place against Israel and its occupation. Many Palestinians already see this as a form of collaboration with Israel, not only because Israel fails to recognize any
Palestinian national rights, while continuing its occupation, building Jewish settlements, demolishing homes, confiscating land etc., but also because Israel has simply killed over 6000 Palestinians since the Intifada began, and it is hardly the time to cooperate on 'security matters' with those who are killing the Palestinian popular leadership.

One way to parse what's going on is to read Qaddoumi's document carefully. Abu Mazen's participation in the discussion is not actually as incriminating as one might think.

Former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is the one who raises the issue of killing Arafat and other resistance leaders. Abu Mazen plays a kind of restraining role to Sharon, essentially arguing that neither the marginalization of Arafat nor brute force will deter the resistance or help anyone. The only way to control the situation is to have Palestinians control their affairs and to get the Israeli army out of Palestinian cities.

This raises the possibility of tactics in negotiations, which could be playing out here as well, if the document is genuine.

The PA was most interested at the time in winning time, and hopefully an Israeli withdrawal on the ground. Dahlan and Abbas' interventions in the discussion, though cynical and seemingly treasonous, are consistent in pushing for this end. Perhaps they presumed that Sharon anyway would act as he pleased, defending what he saw as Israel's interests. The PA needed to bring about an Israeli withdrawal, so they could reorganize their ranks, which were severely fragmented by Israel's blows. I don't even see it as beyond Arafat to have sent Abu Mazen and Dahlan to the meeting with these directives in the first place, allowing them to say what needed to be said to bring about this desired result. He couldn't have done so himself. But Dahlan and Abu Mazen could. Such short term opportunism characterized Arafat's leadership style, as long as the movement (and his leadership over it) was able to survive.

In any respect, Israel's strategy to extinguish the Intifada relied upon shaking the Palestinian leadership, showing them who's boss, eliminating any rebellious nationalist figures through assassination or imprisonment, and simply playing on the contradictions that emerged within the Palestinian elite as it struggled for its survival.

In this regard, it is difficult to assess how seriously Abu Mazen and Dahlan aspired to take advantage of Israeli maneuvers to prepare the ground for taking power from Arafat. No doubt Abu Mazen and Dahlan both had interests in pushing Arafat out of the way. And the tension did spill over to the extent that Abu Mazen in fact did resign as Prime Minister, because he
believed he was not getting enough power from Arafat. But the question remains whether the duo would go the length of cooperating with Israel towards that end. Israel's maneuvers - including the assassination of resistance leaders from other factions, as well as from within Fateh - no doubt make Abu Mazen and Dahlan passive benefactors of Israel's policies. But this is also not the same as participation in murder.

Time will tell what comes of the affair, and all eyes are set on what happens at Fateh's conference. If Abu Mazen and his crew are able to assert leadership and control over the party, Qaddoumi and his allegations will be buried in history. But if elements of the party are determined to raise what happened in the waning days of Arafat 's rule, sticky questions will remain that threaten to split the party. Much will depend upon the composition of the conference itself, and to what extent Fateh opposition figures are allowed to participate. Additionally you have the movement¹s most popular figure (Marwan Barghouti) sitting in an Israeli prison serving out a five-life term sentence, whose opinion is likely to have substantial weight in determining the trajectory of coming developments.

Palestine Solidarity Campaign Belongs to its Members

Earlier this year we ran two articles on the situation whereby a secretive political group, which originated in the International Marxist Group, but which doesn't print any literature or even have a web presence of its own, has taken over PSC. The group, Socialist Action, seems to have completely jetissoned any class politics, hence why one of their supporters in PSC, Carole Regan, has taken exception to the occasions when I have termed Mahmoud Abbas a 'quisling'. Abbas it might be recalled when the Gaza war started, spent more of his time blaming Hamas than criticising Israel. Abbas co-ordinated his every move with President Mubarak of Egypt, who has been a junior partner to Israel in enforcing the siege of Gaza. This is of course unsurprising since it has been widely reported that Abbas's security forces have been trained by the CIA, with Israel's complicity, in the arts of repressing their own people. Socialist Action's behaviour is a model of how the Left should not behave. Packing meetings, taking over organisations and then running them in the interests of the group not the wider movement, denial and secretiveness about their intentions, manipulativeness etc. And as Lenin put it in a different context, their attitude to those on PSC Executive who have gone along with them without actually being members is that they are 'useful idiots'.

This is why a group of us have come together to try and reverse what is happening before it is too late. Already Socialist Action have appointed 3 of their members as staff of PSC (nothing like equal opportunities policies with them!) and in the process fired without warning or explanation, the bookkeeper. An essential tactic if you are taking over an organisation is to ensure that the finances are in your hands so you can ensure that no one will spot what you are up to. We are therefore holding a meeting in Birmingham, this Saturday August 8th at 1.30 p.m. at the Carrs Lane Church & Community Centre. All those interested in seeing PSC run democratically are welcome to attend.

Below is a statement that I have, after discussion, sent round to people who are interested in seeing a democratic, Palestine Solidarity Campaign in Britain.

Tony Greenstein - founder member of PSC

Dear Friend,

At the last AGM of Palestine Solidarity Campaign in January 2009, it became apparent that PSC has effectively been subject to a ‘take-over’ by a tiny political group Socialist Action and its supporters. http://azvsas.blogspot.com/2009/02/subverting-of-palestine-solidarity.html This was evidenced most clearly by a secret memorandum which had been sent out by Bernard Regan urging support for what was a particular slate. This phenomenon is, as far as I’m aware a first in PSC.

A flavour of what Socialist Action is about can be gleaned from the following: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_Action_(UK)#cite_note-AS190108-1.

In recent months it has become ever more clear that the priorities and strategy of SA and its supporters have come to dominate PSC in two ways: administrative and political. Examples of this include:

1. The opposition of the PSC Executive to a motion calling for breaking the links with Histadrut, the Zionist’s racist ‘trade union’. http://azvsas.blogspot.com/2009/01/palestine-solidarity-campaign-executive.html
2. The complete failure to discuss the role played by the Palestinian Authority and the effect this has on Palestine solidarity work.
3. The appointment of at least 2 staff members who are aligned with Socialist Action.
4. The continued obstruction of the right of regions in PSC to nominate representatives to PSC Executive.
5. The refusal to appoint the runner-up in last year’s election to the Executive when a previous member of Socialist Action took up a paid staff position.
6. The accusation that the BDS committee has not prioritised its work or related well to the EC and the staff
7. The operation of the Trade Union Advisory Committee which is shrouded in secrecy – noone knows who is a member or has seen minutes – which is nonetheless able to nominate two people to the Executive.

These are just some examples of the problems that have arisen.

A group of us have therefore come together in order to discuss this situation and try to find a way forward, in particular the approach we should adopt at the next PSC AGM in January 2010.. We are holding a meeting at the

Carrs Lane Church Centre,
Carrs Lane,
Birmingham B4 7SX

Saturday August 8th from
1.30-5.00 p.m.

There is a map below showing how to get to the Centre.

In Solidarity

Tony Greenstein – Brighton PSC (personal capacity)