Break the siege

2007: Forty years on

UK National Union of Journalists votes to boycott Israeli goods

I guess journalists aren't so bad, after all. :)
---
NUJ votes to boycott Israeli goods
Stephen Brook
Friday April 13, 2007
MediaGuardian.co.uk

Jeremy Dear: general secretary of the NUJ. Photo Stefano Cagnoni

The National Union of Journalists has voted at its annual meeting for a boycott of Israeli goods as part of a protest against last year's war in Lebanon.

Today's vote was carried 66 to 54 - a result that met with gasps and a small amount of applause from the union delegates present.

The vote came during a series of motions on international affairs and reads: "This ADM [annual delegate meeting] calls for a boycott of Israeli goods similar to those boycotts in the struggles against apartheid South Africa led by trade unions and the TUC [Trades Union Congress] to demand sanctions be imposed on Israel by the British government and the United Nations."

The motion was originally brought by the union's South Yorkshire branch and opposed by the Cumberland branch, which said it was too political and was not tied closely enough to journalistic matters.

After a show of hands twice failed to give a clear result, union scrutineers were called in and the doors to the conference room closed.

The vote on the motion was taken after it was split from a larger motion that condemned the "savage, pre-planned attack on Lebanon by Israel" last year.

This motion, known as Composite B in Order Paper 4, was carried by a large majority and also condemned the "slaughter of civilians by Israeli troops in Gaza and the IDF's [Israeli Defense Forces] continued attacks inside Lebanon following the defeat of its army by Hezbollah".

The motion called for the end of Israeli aggression in Gaza and other occupied territories.

The union's national executive committee has been instructed to support organisations including the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign, Jews for Justice in Palestine and the Council for the Advancement of Arab-British Understanding.

· To contact the MediaGuardian newsdesk email editor@mediaguardian.co.uk or phone 020 7239 9857. For all other inquiries please call the main Guardian switchboard on 020 7278 2332.

· If you are writing a comment for publication, please mark clearly "for publication".

Jews for Boycotting Israel: A New Initiative

J-BIG members believe that Israel's policies "constitute a betrayal of the best trends in Jewish ethical tradition" and operate a form of racism.

By Ruth Tenne
PalestineChronicle.com

The latest report of the International Development Select Committee regarding the Occupied Palestinian Territories (31 January 2007) makes for very distressing reading. In its section on trade, it refers to the ongoing restrictions in movements and access faced by the OPT, citing an OXFAM report which points out "that transaction costs for Palestinians wishing to export products are up to 70% higher than for Israelis exporting the same product. This market benefit is also true of products produced by Israeli settlers in the West Bank who can get direct access to markets in or through Israel without the disruptive road blocks and back-to-back transfers faced by the Palestinians. In addition, Palestinians face a range of regulations which do not appear to be linked to security. Moreover, the Palestinians are obliged to rely on Israeli intermediaries to transport their goods and therefore, do not pay purchase taxes and customs to the Palestinian Authority, which creates further losses to the economy of 3% of the GDP a year. The report concludes that "the viability of a future Palestinian economy depends significantly on its trading opportunities."

In order to challenge the stronghold Israel has on Palestine and its fledgling economy, a group of Jewish and Israeli residents in Britain was set up as a subsection of the campaign undertaken by Boycott Israeli Goods – BIG (www.bigcampaign.org.uk) . The new group, J-BIG, is an outcome of the deep frustration Jewish peace activists feel towards the inaction displayed by the Jewish community and its liberal wing with regard to Israel\'s repressive occupation of Palestinian land. J-BIG members believe that Israel\'s policies "constitute a betrayal of the best trends in Jewish ethical tradition" and operate a form of racism which is reminiscent of South African Apartheid - inflaming hatreds that render impossible the achievement of a just peace for both Israelis and Palestinians. Like ‘Enough!’ - the new coalition of trade unions, peace, faith and human right organisations in Britain- J-BIG believes that the British Government fails to stand up for the right of the Palestinian people and thus, calls for a consorted grass roots action. Along with the wider BIG campaign, members take part in direct action aiming to prevent the marketing and selling of goods and produce originating from the illegal settlements in the West Bank and from Israeli companies, especially those which are known to profit from the unlawful occupation. J-BIG’s strength is in the fact that being Jewish, we are unlikely to encounter charges of Anti-Semitism, made frequently by the Jewish community against those who criticise Israel\'s policies. At the same time, we hope that our stance will act as a "wake- up" call for the Jewish community in Britain and offer some symbolic support to the Palestinians who tend to regard the Jewish community as a keen champion of Israel’s policies. We hope that our actions will help attract greater publicity for the BIG campaign. Indeed, a recent picketing of Carmel- Agrexco, an Israeli marketing company, gained much publicity in the Jewish and Israeli press.

Carmel-Agrexco is a 50% Israeli state-owned export company which is responsible for exporting the majority of fruit and vegetables from illegal settlements in the West Bank to the UK. The UK forms a large part of the market for settlement produce, making up 60% of Agrexco\'s total exports. Agrexco profits from Israel\'s illegal occupation and entrenched system of racial apartheid in the occupied Palestinian territories. In the Jordan Valley of the West Bank, Agrexco set its farms on confiscated Palestinian land offering Palestinian farmers less than a living wage. Carmel-Agrexco can deliver fruits and vegetables to Europe in 24 hours while the produce of Palestinian farmers cannot get through the illegal Israeli military checkpoints and has to be left to rot in the field .

The picket of Carmel - Agrexco took place shortly before Valentine Day when the demand for Agrexco’s flowers is at its highest. Although the number of those picketing was just above 100, the attendance of J-BIG attracted special attention by the Israeli press. Interviewed by the Jerusalem Post, Deborah Fink - the convener of J-BIG, contended: "This is a grass roots action. It is a way the ordinary person can put pressure on Israel... It’s also to tell Jews that what Israel is doing is wrong. What Israel is doing is going against Jewish ethics. Uprooting olive trees is against Jewish law" Although the representative of Carmel -Agrexco UK dismissed the disruptive action, there is no doubt that such an action has a cumulative effect which help to turn consumers and the public against Israel, whose 2006 bombardment of Lebanon, "summer rain" shelling of Gaza and continued military incursions into the West Bank are etched in the public consciousness. Indeed, the results of a recent worldwide BBC’s poll of 28,000 people in 27 countries show that Israel is the most negatively viewed county. 56% of interviewees felt that Israel has a mostly negative influence on the world - a rating which is higher than any other country, including Iran and North Korea (Jewish News 8 March 2007).

J-BIG\'s campaign however, is not focused on one-off events. It is in the process of launching an ongoing campaign which will put pressure on supermarkets by informing them and their customers about Israel’s violation of human rights in the Occupied Territories, and of Israel\'s use of unethical and exploitative methods in marketing the produce of its illegal settlements in the West Bank - taking advantage of Palestinian labour and produce. In addition, J-BIG members will be requesting supermarkets to clearly label all goods which originate from the West Bank and Israel in order to help consumers make an ethical choice.

An additional aim of J-BIG is to promote Palestinian produce, especially extra virgin, organic, olive oil which is marketed by Zaytoun (www.zaytoun.org ) in accordance with the Fair Trade\'s code of practice. The olive oil comes directly from the West Bank and from Israeli Palestinian farmers who suffer from restrictions on their land ownership and use of water resources in Israel, (for a full account of the restrictions and discrimination suffered by Israeli Palestinians see Susan Nathan\'s book:The Other Side of Israel,2005). J-BIG members are promoting the sale of Zaytoun oil by giving it greater publicity through the media and by direct contact with potential vendors. They also aim to improve the market penetration of Zaytoun by selling the oil directly to friends, family relatives and members of the public. Palestine is the origin of the olive tree with some of the oldest olive groves in the world dating as far back as 1500 to 2000 years. This fact combined with the Mediterranean climate, rich fertile soil and the use of organic traditional farming methods makes Zaytoun\'s Palestinian olive oil a world beating product, with which Israeli olive oil that is produced mostly from younger olive trees, will find hard to compete.

On a political level, members of J-BIG have joined the wider campaign for abolishing the special trade and economic benefits granted to Israel as part of its trade agreement with the European Union. Indeed a significant number of British MPs appear to support this campaign. In February 2007 an Early Day Motion (EDM ) submitted to Parliament by Derek Wyatt notes that Israel "has routinely prevented the free movement of Palestinian goods and people and has withheld Palestinian funds from their people. ..... These and other grievous human rights abuses represent a clear breach of Article Two of the EU-Israel Association Agreement, which calls for adherence to human rights" . The EDM goes on to commend the International Development Select Committee\'s recommendation that "the UK should urge the EU to use the Association Agreement with Israel as a lever for change and to consider suspending the Agreement until there are further improvements in access arrangements".

J-BIG and other activists have been writing to their respective MPs and requesting them to support Wyatt\'s EDM. It appears that the number of British MPs who have been signing the EDM is indeed growing, and the campaign for bearing pressure on Israel is taking root.

Being an Israeli-born citizen I hope , like the rest of my colleagues, that our campaign of boycotting Israel\'s produce of repression and "fruits of injustice" will successfully spearhead a grass roots action within the Jewish community against a brutal occupation which seeks to stamp out the Palestinians\' legitimate aspirations for nationhood .

Jerusalem church leaders call for support to end embargo

30 March 2007 | 07-0263 |

Jerusalem (ENI). Leaders of churches in Jerusalem in an Easter message have urged Christians around the world to work to end an international financial boycott of the Palestinian government imposed after the Islamist Hamas movement came to power in 2006.

Palestinian hope held hostage

Economic sanctions are keeping Palestinians from building a life.

By Salam Fayyad, SALAM FAYYAD is the minister of finance in the Palestinian unity government.

March 31, 2007

TWO WEEKS AGO, I became the minster of finance for a people whose economy has all but collapsed. It was the start of business for the new Palestinian unity government, born after months of tricky on-again, off-again negotiations and amid economic sanctions, bloodshed and misery.

The government came together after a bad year for the struggling Palestinian Authority. Our economic difficulties grew much worse during that period, in the aftermath of a free and fair election that brought Hamas to power. Because Hamas' political platform did not conform to key elements of the peace process, including Palestinian recognition of Israel's right to exist and a commitment to renounce violence, the international community imposed sanctions on the Palestinian Authority.

Although much of the discussion leading to the formation of the unity government has focused on these two commitments, their validity should not have been much in question. After all, these commitments were made by the Palestine Liberation Organization, the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, in a crystal-clear and binding agreement in 1993, and no Palestinian government has the authority to revoke them. In fact, the unity government's platform explicitly states that it will honor all PLO agreements, which, to be sure, include these two commitments.

As someone who has long worked for peace and reconciliation with Israel — a peace based on mutual recognition of each people's rights — I have always subscribed to the PLO's political program and all the commitments it embodies, including the recognition of Israel's right to exist and the renunciation of violence. I still do. My top priority is to lead the effort to end the economic sanctions and to restore the integrity of our public finance system.

A harsh and painful year after the onset of the sanctions, staggering poverty and unemployment rates prevail. Today, almost two-thirds of the Palestinian population lives in poverty, with per-capita income at 60% of its level in 1999. But as Thomas Jefferson said: "If we are to dream, the flatteries of hope are as cheap, and pleasanter, than the gloom of despair." As a Palestinian, I have a duty to hope and to work tirelessly to make the dreams of my people a reality.

We Palestinians dream of living normal lives. We dream of an end to the days when Palestinian farmers in the West Bank watch their crops destroyed to make way for Israeli-only roads, an end to the days when Palestinian children must brave Israeli military checkpoints to get to school and an end to the days when Gaza's 1.4 million Palestinians are sealed inside their territory, cut off from the rest of the world. Like all people, we deserve freedom in our own land. We deserve democratic, transparent and accountable institutions. And we deserve to live in peace and economic cooperation with all our neighbors, including Israel.

Over the years, the international community has encouraged and supported Palestinians in building democratic institutions to serve as the foundation of our future state. Donor assistance helped pay for the building of schools, hospitals and roads in addition to supporting good governance and providing the know-how to create a functioning administration.

In my previous term as finance minister, from June 2002 to December 2005, I played a leading role in establishing transparency and accountability in government finances through the introduction of a series of deep, wide-ranging reforms that helped bring our public finance system up to international standards. These included the consolidation of all government revenues in the Ministry of Finance, the elimination of extra-budgetary spending and the regular publication of detailed financial statements.

Since the international sanctions were imposed, aid has continued to flow, which has helped prevent starvation. But by channeling funds so that they bypass the Ministry of Finance, donors have unintentionally contributed to reversing these institution-building gains. The money coming in can no longer be traced, and we cannot ensure that it is not being misappropriated.

Also, our dependence on foreign-aid handouts is increasing while our economic development is stifled. In 2005, for example, only 16% of European Union aid to Palestine was classified as humanitarian. Last year, that figure rose to 56%.

We do not aspire to be a beggar nation, dependent on the world to feed our people. We have the capacity, education and talent to build a thriving economy and a strong democracy. But we cannot do so while Israel seals our borders and withholds tax revenue it owes us, or while U.S. banking regulations prevent banks from handling government business.

In order that we may begin again to develop the institutions and systems that will make us self-reliant and that will buttress the foundation of our future state, the sanctions must be lifted.

The U.S. has long acknowledged — as has the entire world community — that the formation of a viable, independent Palestinian state on the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip is the way out of this nearly 60-year-old conflict. But until the international community demonstrates the political will to help bring about a comprehensive settlement — one that will grant Palestinians the freedom to build our own economy and institutions in our own land — we will all continue to pay the price. Despair will continue to erode hope. And, lest we forget the words of Jefferson, hope is indeed "as cheap, and pleasanter."

“Ireland-Palestine Solidarity Campaign triumph over French multinational involved in Israeli tram project”

Ma’an News
March 17th, 2007 |

Jerusalem – Ma’an – The Ireland-Palestine Solidarity Campaign (IPSC) has successfully exerted pressure on an Irish transport organisation, Veolia, leading them to cancel a contract to train Israeli drivers for a light railway system in East Jerusalem. The railway system will link several Israeli settlements in East Jerusalem to West Jerusalem; the settlements include Pisgat Ze’ev, French Hill, Neve Ya’akov and Gilo.

Veolia is a constituent of Connex, the rail company that is currently building the tramline in East Jerusalem. Connex was awarded the $500 million US contract to build and operate Jerusalem’s light rail system.

Israel had been holding negotiations with Veolia to train Israeli engineers and drivers on the Dublin Luas tramline system. But Irish trade union representatives, in response to the IPSC, exerted pressure on Veolia to withdraw from the proposed project.

British charity, War on Want, reported an IPSC spokesperson as saying that: “This is a small but significant victory for the Palestinian right to self-determination. This tramline, like the Apartheid Wall, is an integral component of Israel’s annexation of East Jerusalem. You would expect a tramline to be fairly innocuous, but the lesson is no: when you do business with Israel, you invariably do business with the Occupation. Veolia clearly understand that there is a growing awareness of this within Irish society. People are realising that diplomacy has utterly failed to curb Israeli crimes. We must cut ties with Israel in order to force it to end its Occupation,”

The spokesperson further stated, “Veolia’s position, however, is extraordinary. In cancelling this contract, Veolia acknowledge that the Israeli line is illegal and unsupportable. Yet it is they who are building it! The hypocrisy is inexcusable, and their attempts to deny that they bowed to pressure are laughable. Since the Minister for Transport and the Railway Procurement Agency have ultimate control over who runs the Luas, the IPSC now calls on Martin Cullen and the RPA to cancel Veolia’s contract unless they cease building this illegal tramline on occupied Palestinian territory.”

The IPSC concluded by stating that: “If human rights groups and Palestinian solidarity campaigns can ensure that no country will train Israeli engineers and drivers, then perhaps we can help to ‘derail’ this criminal project entirely.”

Posted in Press clippings, Jerusalem Region, Boycott & sanctions
by Ma’an News

Israel risks isolation as Hamas-Fatah coalition takes office

· US fails to join boycott over peace conditions
· Europe and UK sound out moderates in new cabinet

Ian Black, Middle East editor, Rory McCarthy in Jerusalem and Ewen MacAskill in Washington
Friday March 16, 2007
The Guardian

Israel seems to be heading for confrontation with Britain and the EU after announcing a total boycott of the new Palestinian national unity government, due to be sworn in tomorrow after months of factional violence and political uncertainty.

"Israel will not deal with this new government and we hope the international community will stand firmly by its own principles and refuse to deal with a government that says no to peace and no to reconciliation," said Mark Regev, the foreign ministry spokesman.

Israel objects to the new government's failure to meet the three conditions laid down by the international community: recognise Israel, renounce violence and accept previous peace agreements. But Britain and the EU appear willing to deal with the unity government on a selective basis, and there are signs that even the US - anxious to appease its conservative Arab allies - may part company with the Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert, over the issue. Washington conspicuously failed to announce a boycott of its own, saying it was reserving judgment.

The Hamas leader, Ismail Haniyeh, remains prime minister and his Islamist movement continues to have a major influence. Other key positions have been given to moderate independents in the hope of lifting the international financial boycott and alleviating the deepening economic crisis, especially in Gaza.

Diplomats said yesterday that the US had been close to agreeing to a total boycott but "pulled back from the brink" and agreed to work with the reforming finance minister, Salam Fayyad, a US-educated economist who has worked for the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. Condoleezza Rice, the secretary of state, would like to open discussions with the non-Hamas members, in particular Mr Fayyad, it is understood. "It will be hard for the Americans to support a complete boycott," said one ambassador.

Asked if the White House would deal with Mr Fayyad, including as a channel for US aid funds, the state department spokesman Sean McCormack said: "Any questions about who we will or will not deal with, we are just going to wait."

But a senior British official was pessimistic, saying: "My impression at the moment is that the Americans are unwilling to work with the new government."

Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president and Fatah leader, has been in close contact with the US as well as Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan in recent days. Britain has told Israel it will deal with non-Hamas ministers - the official formulation is "different people in the government" - and other EU governments are likely to follow. France hailed the coalition as a "new page" in relations with the international community but linked future cooperation to Palestinian efforts to halt violence against Israel and secure the release of a captured Israel soldier, Gilad Shalit.

Final positions have yet to be agreed in internal discussions in several key capitals. "There's a huge row going on," said one European diplomat. "The Foreign Office is arguing with Downing Street, the state department with the national security council, and the German chancellery with the German foreign ministry."

Officials in Brussels said the EU might send funds through Mr Fayyad as a first step towards restoring direct assistance. Another possibility is broadening an existing mechanism for delivering purely humanitarian relief to include direct payments to the Palestinian government.

"We will not be taking any decisions before we have been able to judge the programme and actions of the new administration," said Emma Udwin, a spokeswoman for the European commission.

Under the spotlight will be the new government's political programme, which remains vague. Policies include continuing a four-month truce with Israel in Gaza and talk of "respecting" previous peace deals. However there is no explicit recognition of Israel and the platform appears to reaffirm a broad "right of resistance". The policies are broadly based on a Hamas-Fatah agreement reached last year.

Factional fighting, which continued sporadically in Gaza yesterday, has killed more than 130 Palestinians. Restoring security will be the job of the new interior minister, Hani Kawasmeh, a low-key, independent bureaucrat who has inherited the most difficult position in the government.

The hope is that even partial western engagement with the new government will create some sense of momentum before the Arab summit in Riyadh, the Saudi capital, at the end of the month.

Blood up over war diamonds

A campaign to boycott Israeli "blood diamonds" has been launched by a group established to raise awareness of the international plight of the Palestinian people.

Click on image to enlarge


Kathryn Hayes
Irish Examiner
February 5, 2007

An Apple too far from the Tree

Related

"And they complain about a boycott?"
---
Wednesday, January 31, 2007

An Apple too far from the Tree for Ben Gurion University?

WAS Professor Arens too far from tree, or is BGU too close to Israeli government; and NATO?

More on our item concerning Yigal Arens, the Israeli-born professor to whom organisers of a conference at the Ben Gurion University decided to rescind an invitation, in case his presence embarassed government officials attending.
("And they complain about a boycott", Saturday January 27
http://randompottins.blogspot.com/2007/01/and-they-complain-about-boycott.html

This is from the leading Israeli daily, Ha'Aretz:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/819173.html

Ha'aretz, Mon., January 29
Arens and the tree

By Akiva Eldar

Professor Yigal Arens fell very far from the tree. The son of a former defense minister and head of the Likud, he went so far to the left that a respected university in Israel cancelled his participation in a scientific conference. Dr. Bracha Shapira of Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, one of the organizers of the conference, has stated that the organizers have chosen to remain silent.

Arens, who immigrated many years ago to California, heads two centers that deal with information systems on matters of intelligence, the war against terror and digital government. At the beginning of January a colleague, an American professor, invited him to participate in a working group that will convene this coming summer at Ben-Gurion University. The conference, which is funded by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), will deal with the role played by the Internet in terror and its prevention.

The colleague said that the organizers, and among them Shapira, would be very glad if Arens accepted the invitation.Five days later, before Arens replied to the invitation, his American colleague informed him that he should forget the whole thing. He related that the Israeli organizers had told him that government personnel who had been invited to the meeting would not feel comfortable in his presence. Arens sent an e-mail to Shapira and asked that she explain the withdrawal of the invitation. She replied that his American colleague had "exceeded his authority in extending the invitation without full consultation with the conference organizers."

According to Arens, the organizers had been aware initially of his political background.(*) They learned about it from his American colleague who wanted to make certain, at Arens' request, that they would spare him any unpleasantness, which according to him had been his lot at previous conferences in Israel.

The organizers of a conference at an academic institution that benefits from public monies do not believe it is the public's right to know whether there is anything of substance in the grave suspicion that a scientists' political opinions disqualify him from entering their gates. Arens, in fact, concealed nothing. For many years he has supported two states for two peoples, but today he fears "that a two-state solution is no longer practically possible."

Arens believes that Israel should be a state for all its citizens, supports the right of return for Palestinian refugees and is opposed to any form of discrimination among citizens on the basis of their ethnic or religious background.

© Copyright 2007 Haaretz. All rights reserved§§§§§§§§§§

Yigal Arens comments on the differences between this report and the Hebrew original
http://www.haaretz.co.il/hasite/pages/ShArtPE.jhtml?itemNo=819318&contrassID=2&subContrassID=2&sbSubContrassID=0

The Hebrew version unnecessarily embellishes my resume a bit. That wasn't included in the English translation. I haven't written any books on the subject, although I participated in writing a study on a related topic (the use of IT in disaster management), and have co-authored a workshop report on responding to "unexpected events". There are other mostly minor differences between the English and Hebrew versions, the most significant being that the English one says I believe the organizers *were* originally aware of my politics, while the Hebrew one correctly states that I believe they were *not*.

Don’t Flirt with the Occupation - February 10th Mass Demonstration Against Carmel-Agrexco in London

January 31st, 2007

Agrexco is Israel’s largest exporter of fresh agricultural produce. The company is 50% owned by the Israeli state. Agrexco accounts for 70% ofIsraeli fresh produce sold abroad with annual sales of $750 million in 2006. Agrexco boast of being able to get produce to European markets within 24 hours.

The Valentines Day period is one of Agrexco UK’s busiest times as the company deals with large amounts of fresh flowers from Israel and the settlements.

The Boycott Israeli Goods campaign is planning a mass picket of the depot on Saturday February 10th in opposition to the sale of Israeli goods and in support of Palestinian farmers who are not able to market their goods internationally

In the UK Agrexco is known under the Carmel, Coral and Jaffa brands. The UK is the most important foreign market for Israeli fresh produce. Agrexco exports a wide range of produce to the UK including peppers, tomatoes, strawberries, herbs, spices, flowers and avocados.

Agrexco is the largest exporter of settlement produce for sale overseas. Much of this produce comes from colonies in the Jordan Valley. Carmel Agrexco hgave had dealings with the colonies of Tomer, Mehola, Hamra, Ro’i, Massua, Patzael, Mekhora, Netiv Ha-Gdud and Bet Ha-Arava.

Palestinian workers in the settlements suffer much worse working conditions and receive half the pay of Israelis.

Carmel-Agrexco’s UK depot has been blockaded 3 times by Palestinian solidarity activists.

Palestinians are calling for the solidarity movement to take action against Carmel Agrexco. 180 Palestinian organisations and unions, in response to the Israeli onslaught, have called for a campaign of Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions against Apartheid Israel.

Meet at 11am, (Bridge Place, Behind Victoria Station, Opposite UK Passport Office, outside the Hisperia Hotel) Central London, for transport to Agrexco’s depot in Middlesex.

Meet at Carmel, Swallowfield Way, Hayes at 1pm (see map) if you are making your own way there. Email boycott@palestinecampaign.org to let us know you are coming.

Posted in Press Releases, International Actions, Boycott & sanctions

*******************************

Click here for YNet report on Israeli flower exports.

by Boycott Israeli Goods

Israeli NGO vows Amazon boycott over Carter review

Related
Carter's book is long overdue
---

---

Jonny Paul Jerusalem Post correspondent, THE JERUSALEM POST

Jan. 18, 2007

---

LONDON - The Israeli Committee against House Demolitions (ICAHD) has opened a campaign to censor on-line retailer Amazon.com following the posting of a critical review of former US president Jimmy Carter's book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid.

The group said the article, written by a customer, was "hostile" to Carter's viewpoint and had been placed in the wrong section of the Web page on the book.

In an e-mail, ICAHD said it was "deeply disturbed" by the treatment of Carter's "important new book" and had issued an ultimatum demanding Amazon move the negative review and "restore a semblance of balance" by giving "comparable space and prominence to a more positive evaluation" of the book.

The group is asking people to write to Jeff Bezos, Amazon's CEO, and to boycott the company. The e-mail says: "You insist on running the complete, 20-paragraph, 1,636-word text of a review unabashedly hostile to Carter's viewpoint.

"You have refused to add information shoppers should have in evaluating this review: the fact that the reviewer, Jeffrey Goldberg, is a citizen of Israel as well as the US, and that he volunteered to serve in the Israeli Defense Forces, for which he worked as a guard at a prison for Palestinian detainees.

"And you have refused to balance his negative review by giving comparable space to a favorable assessment of the book, even though positive reviews by qualified experts have appeared in many reputable publications."

The ICAHD said it was "not interested in supporting a corporation that uses its power in the marketplace in such a biased and unconstructive way on such an important issue."

An ultimatum is then delivered: "If you do not, by January 22, remove the Goldberg review, move it to the more appropriate 'See all Editorial Reviews' page, or restore a semblance of balance by giving comparable space and prominence to a more positive evaluation of Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, we... pledge to stop shopping at Amazon... and encourage our friends, family and associates to do likewise."

In a March 2005 brief, NGO Monitor, part of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, described the Committee against House Demolitions as "a well-funded, blatantly political and ideological one-man NGO, which couches its radical anti-Israel agenda and demonization in the rhetoric of human rights."

The brief continues: ICAHD coordinator Jeff "Halper routinely uses terms such as 'apartheid' and 'war crimes' to refer to Israeli policy against Palestinian terror, supports a 'one state solution,' and advocates sanctions and boycotts."

Life in Gaza -- an account by a Gazan doctor

With Mona El-Farra, Mohammed Omer, and Amira Hass
KALW Your Call
December 28, 2006

Commentary: Pathetic questions by a silly California interviewer... "what can't you buy in the supermarket..."

Overview of what is happening in Gaza...

Why an academic boycott of Israel is necessary

Lawrence Davidson, The Electronic Intifada, 3 January 2007

Amnesty International's secretary-general, Irene Khan, visits the gate of Ras Atja in Israel's separation fence in the West Bank near Qalqilia, December 10, 2006. (MaanImages/Magnus Johansson)

Let me begin by stating that any successful academic boycott imposed upon Israeli institutions of higher education will assuredly have an impact on the academic freedom of Israeli scholars and teachers, at least in terms of its expression beyond their national borders. Is this acceptable? After all, other teachers and scholars who obviously have a stake in academic freedom, will have to cooperate with the boycott if it is to have an impact. As one of those academics, my answer to this question is that it is not only acceptable but absolutely necessary -- and for the following reasons:

1. Academic freedom is an ideal, and ideals if they are to be responsibly adhered to, must be judged against their consequences in real life situations. One of the major real life situations we are dealing with here is the fact that Israeli academic institutions and personnel have been intimately involved for nearly 40 years in their country's systematic destruction of Palestinian educational endeavors (and thus Palestinian academic freedom) within the Occupied Territories. And even longer, if less dramatically, as regards the Arab-Israeli community within Israel proper. The vast majority of Israel academics have either been silent, or active participants in this process.

The passive aspect of this complicity with the occupation has been commented upon by Tanya Reinhart, formerly a professor of Linguistics at Tel Aviv University. She tells us that "Never in its history did the senate of a any Israeli university pass a resolution protesting the frequent closure of Palestinian universities, let alone voice protest over the devastation sowed there [in the OT]....It is not that a motion in that direction failed to gather a majority, there was no such motion anywhere in Israeli academia." And then there is Professor Ilan Pappe of Haifa University, who estimates that the number of Israeli academics who have "raised their voices against occupation" is "roughly 100 out of 9000." And many of these, like Pappe himself, are subject to harassment by university administrators and social ostracization by their peers.

In terms of active collaboration with the occupation the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel has noted that "Israeli research institutes, think tanks and academic departments have historically granted legitimacy to the work of academics who advocate ethnic cleansing, apartheid, denial of refugee rights, and other discriminatory policies....Collaboration and cooperation with the intelligence services, the army, and other agencies of the occupation regime is part of the routine work of the Israeli academy."

Thus, with the passive or active assistance of the vast majority of Israeli professorate, Palestinian education at all levels in the Occupied Territory is often brought to a near standstill by closures and roadblocks while its teachers, students, and physical structures suffer repeated assaults by Israeli military and settler paramilitary forces. All of this is documented at, among other places, Birzeit University's Right2Education website.

Given this context, there is no evidence that the "free flow of ideas" enjoyed by Israeli academia over the last 40 years has ameliorated the systematic attack on their Palestinian peers in any way. Indeed, as we will see, it may in fact have helped abet that attack. Many Israeli scholars and teachers have spent a lot of this time trying very hard to deny what is going on in Palestine by questioning the existence of the Palestinians as a national group while simultaneously helping to create the justifications for a process of dispossession that has solidified Palestinian national consciousness and driven some Palestinians to radical violence. Only in the recent past has the Palestinian side of this tragedy been made available in any widespread fashion to the outside world.

Yet to a great extent the damage has been done. The decades long Zionist monopoly on the flow of information on the Israeli-Palestinian tragedy allowed the Israelis to build solid support among Americans and others based on the racist stereotyping of Arabs generally and the Palestinians in particular. Thus, not only has academic freedom and other forms of free exchange not humanized the Israelis, it has led to the corruption of a good number of people in the West, particularly American politicians.

Now, after 40 years, a growing number of academics are reacting to this inhumane state of affairs. We are insisting that the situation we are in now, as regards academic freedom, is a perverse one. Essentially, in order to maintain the academic freedom of Israeli scholars and teachers we are asked to acquiesce in their direct or indirect abetting of the destruction of, among other aspects of Palestinian life, Palestinian academic freedom. We will not do this. I suggest to you that the only way to avoid this predicament (which essentially turns the ideal of academic freedom against itself) is to qualify this principle, and make it a corollary of academic freedom that it can not apply to those who systematically and consistently deny it to others. In order to do this in as fair and consistent a way as possible, the present academic boycott movement is aimed at halting all cooperation with Israeli academic and research institutions rather than any particular list of individuals.

2. A precedent for the acceptance of such an academic boycott was established when just such an effort was made as part of the overall, worldwide boycott of Apartheid South Africa. Israel's own apartheid policies have been noted by such reputable observers as Jimmy Carter and Desmond Tutu, and documented by such organizations as Amnesty International, Israel's own human rights organization, B'Tselem, and even, on occasion, the U.S. State Department. Analysis of Israeli state actions, policies, and cultural imperatives as they operate on both sides of the Green Line, but especially in the Occupied Territories, reflects a purposeful and systematic violation of the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of Apartheid (approved by the UN General Assembly in 1973 and coming into force in 1976). It is therefore reasonable that a tactic that may well have hastened the demise of one apartheid state be applied against another apartheid state.

3. The fact that Zionist influence spreads far beyond Israel's area of dominion and now influences many of the policy making institutions of western governments, and particularly that of the United States, makes it imperative that Israel's oppressive behavior be singled out as a high priority case from among the many other oppressive regimes that may be candidates for boycott. In other words, unlike the Chinese, the Russians and other such governments, the Israelis and their supporters directly influence the policy makers of our own countries and this often makes our governments accomplices in Israel's abusive policies. This being so, prioritizing Israel for boycott (academic and otherwise) is not hypocrisy, but rather necessity.

In conclusion, Israel's academic community cannot be allowed to proceed as if it has nothing to do with the destruction of Palestinian society, including its academy and academic freedom. Given their direct and indirect complicity in this criminal process, the placing of temporary limits on the freedom of 9000 Israeli academics is a necessary price that must be paid in the struggle to restore the fundamental rights of millions of Palestinians.


Lawrence Davidson is Professor of Middle East History at West Chester University in West Chester Pennsylvania. This is the text of a talk delivered at the Annual Meeting of the Middle East Studies Association (MESA) in Boston on November 19, 2006. The talk is reprinted with permission of the author.


Related Links

BY TOPIC: Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions

Only an end to sanctions can halt Palestine's crisis

Azzam Tamimi Tuesday December 19, 2006
The Guardian

As Hamas and Fatah supporters took to the streets to protest at or support Mahmoud Abbas's decision to call for early presidential elections, congratulatory gestures landed at Abbas's door from the three major international players that have imposed the sanctions regime against the Palestinians. The White House, Tony Blair and the Israeli government urged the world community to support Abbas in his latest bid to rid them of a Hamas-led government. These three carry the burden of Palestinian blood shed as a result of the crisis.

Despite months of sanctions, the grip of the "international community" could not prevent Hamas from bringing in enough money to maintain basic health and educational services. The hardship did little to convince Palestinians that Hamas was responsible; polls conducted in the West Bank and Gaza pointed to a rise in the popularity of Hamas, countered by an erosion of respect for Fatah.

So what does the global community think it can achieve? A resolution, as Blair naively believes? A resumption of negotiations on Israeli terms as Olmert arrogantly expects? An end to all Palestinian struggles for justice as the neocon-led US administration ignorantly hopes? Or an end to rivalry from an Islamic resistance movement that is loyal to the Palestinian dream, as Abbas wishes? There is only one way out of the crisis, and that is for the sanctions to be lifted. The immediate consequence would be the formation of a national unity government without dictation from any outside power. As for the Israelis, their only guarantee of peace would be to recognise the legitimate rights of the Palestinians and enter into negotiations for a long-term truce.

· Dr Azzam Tamimi is director of the Institute of Islamic Political Thought
commentisfree.co.uk/azzam_tamimi

This is an attempt to overturn our elections

Editor's note: This blog is acting up. I may be moving over to thre other one shortly: CRIMES AND CORRUPTION OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER NEWS
---
Karma Nabulsi
Tuesday December 19, 2006
The Guardian

Mahmoud Abbas declared yesterday: "Let the people decide for themselves what they want." But there already is a national consensus: there must be Palestinian elections, not for a president of the Palestinian Authority, or for members of its legislative council, but for the Palestinian National Council, the institutional body that forms the sovereign base of the Palestine Liberation Organisation and is the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. The Palestinian people have already elected a legislative council that represents a proportion of the body politic. They now demand elections for the entire Palestinian population.

---

---

When Fatah lost power to Hamas in January, Fatah needed to avail itself of the democratic benefits that accrue to those who lose power in an election: the opportunity to reconnect with their constituents, to learn why it had lost and how to regain their people's trust. Instead, the "international community" told Fatah it was still in power and had to contnue to play this role or take responsibility for abandoning its suffering people to an even crueller fate .

What we are witnessing today is the horrific and inevitable outcome of a process of deliberate coercion, designed to force an occupied people to surrender their elected representatives. That this coercion is being carried out by the military occupier Israel and its neocon backers in the US administration is to be expected - and resisted. What is harder to understand is just how this coercion can be so flagrantly insisted upon by the British and the EU - who should be standing by the Palestinians, if not for the values of decency then as part of their responsibilities as co-signatories to the fourth Geneva convention.

The Palestinian people have indeed already spoken: for elections to the Palestinian National Council; for lifting the economic boycott of a democratically elected authority; for liberty and independence.

· Karma Nabulsi, a former PLO representative, is an Oxford politics fellow commentisfree.co.uk/karma_nabulsi

Front Page Slander

by Sarah Meyer

Civilization and Truth

Two opposing sides of human nature appeared in the Media within the last 48 hours. Front Page, for me, represents, the Media Face of Darkness.

The Face of Darkness

Jimmy Carter: Jew-Hater, Genocide-Enabler, Liar
14.12.06, D. Horowitz, Front Page. For a full study of this dark media world and their corporate funding, see
The Haditha Doctor and the Media Dissemblers This is relevant information as the Haditha murder trials are about to begin. Compare the above bile with the following Guardian letter:

The Face of Integrity

Israel boycott may be the way to peace
15.12.06. Letters, Guardian. Signed by: John Berger, Brian Eno, Sophie Fiennes, Eduardo Galeano, Reem Kelani, Leon Rosselson, Steven Rose, Arundhati Roy, Ahdaf Soueif, Elia Suleiman and 85 others. Ten Palestinians are killed for every Israeli death; more than 200, many of them children, have been killed since the summer. UN resolutions are flouted, human rights violated as Palestinian land is stolen, houses demolished and crops destroyed. For archbishop Desmond Tutu, as for the Jewish former ANC military commander now South African minister of security, Ronnie Kasrils, the situation of the Palestinians is worse than that of black South Africans under apartheid. See also: BRICUP Palestinian call for academic boycott

Take your pick with care, compassion and tolerance. Peoples’ lives depend on your choice. As for tolerance: I admit my own intolerance for the ethos of Front Page and the above work by Mr. Horowitz. But I am not paid for my intolerance.

UPDATES: Last Word: Jimmy Carter
25.12. – 1.01.07, NEWSWEEK/ MSNBC. Revisiting 'Apartheid.'

For excellent comments on another bulwark of MSM bile, Fox News’ Reilly, click
here.

The url to Front Page Slander
Related Article:Palestine: Wake Up America

Sarah Meyer is a researcher living in the U.K.

WHERE NOT TO SHOP FOR CHRISTMAS

The Peace and War News

Box 40052, 75 King St. S., Waterloo Ont. N2J 4V1 peacenews at sgci.com (insert the @)

For a Canadian foreign policy of peace, justice, and national sovereignty

Nov-Dec 2006: WHERE NOT TO SHOP:

A Follow-up Issue on Boycott – Divestment – Sanctions

Professor: '... no one is willing to publicly defend our investment in Israeli apartheid.'

Letter to the Editor

The SG's preoccupation with Israel makes perfect sense

Posted: 12/5/06

As a faculty member, let me offer a few words in support of the SG's position on Palestine.

No one seems to disagree with the SG that there is a grave injustice in Palestine, that Israel is primarily to blame, that the university is complicit (through our stockholdings in U.S. companies that support the occupation), and that some tangible action should be taken immediately.

The point of contention seems to focus on two issues: (1) That the SG has given undue emphasis to this issue, and (2) that they have not promoted "open and honest debate".

Regarding the first point: certainly there are many pressing issues in the world today, but one can make a good case that the conflict in Palestine is of greatest urgency. No other conflict is directly sustained by U.S. corporations - corporations of which the university is a part-owner. It has affected millions of people (3.8 million Palestinians in the occupied territories, plus millions of Jews and Palestinians worldwide), for nearly 60 years.

And it is globally recognized as a matter of utmost importance. Furthermore, this problem has far-reaching consequences: It was a major factor in both Gulf wars, it was at the root of the 9/11 attacks and the rise of al-Qaeda, and it is a source of great Muslim antipathy toward the U.S. and the West.

The situation in Palestine is, as President Jimmy Carter has recently emphasized, a new apartheid. But it is more insidious and more barbaric than the South African original. Unchecked, it leads to the kind of atrocities we saw this past summer in southern Lebanon: wanton destruction, killing of innocents, phosphorus and cluster bombs dropped on civilian areas.

Apart from issues related to environmental catastrophe, such as global warming, it would be hard to make the case that any conflict is more pressing than this one. And even granting that other issues are of 'equal' importance, there is likely little that students or the university can do to effect change. Take the crisis in Darfur: What, really, can we do to help that problem? The situation in Palestine is unique because we can take a simple and direct action - selling of stock - that will put financial and moral pressure on Israel to end its apartheid and seek a just peace.

Regarding the second point: To my knowledge the students have been fully open to debating this issue. The problem is that no one is willing to publicly defend our investment in Israeli apartheid. Letters from the odd alumnus are about all we see. On the faculty side, I have published op-eds in the University Record (most recently, 11/20), and they draw no rebuttals. I am also working to set up a "Difficult Dialogue" on divestment, but the campus opponents of divestment will not even respond to e-mail requests, let alone speak in public! I think they know that they have no real moral standing. There is simply no excuse for continuing to invest in, and profit from, oppression.

If there are some willing to publicly defend the status quo, let them come forth. Then we will have an "open and honest debate." Until then, divestment has the moral high ground. It is the right thing to do. The administration needs to hear this, from all of us, if there is to be any hope of positive change.


Regards,


David Skrbina

Philosophy

---

© Copyright 2006 Michigan Journal

Dutch bank divests holdings in J'lem light rail, cites settlements

By Meron Rapoport

A Dutch bank has decided to divest itself of its holdings in a French company that is participating in building Jerusalem's light rail system, on the grounds that the project "is not in line with the United Nation's demand to stop all support for Israel's settlement activities."

Work recently began on the railway's first line, which will run from Neveh Ya'akov to Mount Herzl, passing through parts of the city that Israel annexed in 1967 on its way.

ASN, the Dutch bank, holds shares in the French firm, Veolia, whose subsidiary Connex Israel holds about 5 percent of the CityPass consortium. CityPass won the NIS 2 billion tender to build the line.

ASN is a medium-sized bank, with 250,000 customers, deposits totaling two billion euros and investments totaling 900 million euros in 2005. It also considers itself an "ethical bank," and is therefore committed to investing only in projects that do not infringe on human or animal rights or harm the environment.

In May 2006, human rights organizations wrote to ASN claiming that Veolia's work on the light rail project violated international law, because part of the railway will pass through "occupied territory" in East Jerusalem. The Palestinian Authority also wrote to ASN, claiming that the railway's construction would have "devastating effects" on Palestinians living in East Jerusalem, as it would connect the "illegal settlements" of Pisgat Ze'ev and Neveh Ya'akov (two Jerusalem neighborhoods) with downtown Jerusalem, and thereby sever East Jerusalem from the West Bank.

Both the bank and the human rights groups therefore urged Veolia to end its involvement in the project, and the organizations claim that PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas also raised the matter with French President Jacques Chirac. Veolia replied that it is looking into the matter, "but meanwhile, ASN Bank's criteria are not met by that answer," the bank said. As a result, it decided last week to sell its shares in Veolia.

Bank officials told Haaretz that UN resolutions on Jerusalem were the reason for this decision.

The human rights groups are now urging the bank to divest from an Irish construction company that has partnered with an Israeli firm to make concrete used in building the separation fence. ASN told Haaretz it is examining all investments involving Israel and the territories, "as we do for every other region in the world continuously."

Micha Avisar, CEO of Connex Israel, said he could neither confirm nor deny the report. The Light Rail Administration, which is jointly run by the Transportation Ministry and the Jerusalem Municipality, said that this was an internal CityPass affair, but stressed the project is meant to serve all the city's residents, Jewish and Arab alike.

"Our university is complicit too through its investments in arms companies that provide Israel its arsenal."

Monday, November 27, 2006

Palestinian refugees in the Gaza Strip, 1948.
_____________________________________________________

"A flawed democracy"

By Shimaa Abdelfadeel

MICHIGAN DAILY (University of Michigan)
11/27/06

"Since late June, Israel has killed 400 Palestinians in Gaza. In the morning hours of November 8, 2006, in the village of Beit Hanoun,

"Israeli tanks repeatedly fired shells on a house, killing 18 members of the same extended family. Other attacks earlier in the month were launched against peaceful protesters in Gaza. In breaking the months-long cease-fire that Hamas had agreed to this summer, this invasion collectively punished innocent people in the name of Israeli security.

"Promoters of Zionism tout its democracy, which offers legal protection to all. There exists, however, a gap between theory and practice that has bred racial apartheid within Israeli society and between Israel and its occupied populations in Palestine. In a state that asserts the dominance of one religious persuasion, democracy cannot really flourish. By failing to protect a plurality of ethnic and religious groups, the Israeli government exposes non-Jewish populations to persecution in a variety of ways.

"Israeli political leaders like Avigdor Lieberman, who was recently promoted deputy prime minister, explicitly support the ethnic cleansing of Arab populations as a way of preserving the Jewish majority in Israel.

"Immigration law under the Israeli democracy is another site of exclusion. Israel's "Law of Return" offers citizenship to anyone of the Jewish faith from anywhere in the world, yet Palestinian refugees are denied the right to return to their homes and become citizens. These refugees are numbered in the millions and were displaced from their homes at various points during the last 60 years.

"In 1948, Israeli independence came in conjunction with the forced removal of 750,000 Palestinians from their land. Through the years, Israel has conquered and occupied more Palestinian land by war, a violation of the United Nations Charter. During these wars, millions more were displaced from their homes in Israel/Palestine. Despite UN Resolution 194, Israel refuses to grant refugees the right to return home because this would threaten the demographic majority in Israel. In its obsession with maintaining this majority, Israeli policy has led to the removal and marginalization of another people and culture, instead of upholding the values of inclusion and equality that democracies promise to foster.

"Arabs living in Israel as citizens compose the lowest socioeconomic classes. They cannot purchase land owned by the Jewish National Fund, an organization that administers a large proportion of Israel's land and only sells real estate to its Jewish citizens.

"In occupied Palestine, Israeli military rule does not even pretend to uphold democratic values. Nor does it adhere to the Fourth Geneva Convention, which bars the settlement of Israelis on land that is under Israeli military occupation. Not only did Israel transplant 12,000 new settlers into the West Bank after its formal withdrawal from Gaza in 2005, but it also maintained a military siege on the strip, controlling the flow of people and goods in and out and violating Palestinian airspace and ports.

"In the name of security, Israel has laid waste to the Palestinian economy and turned Gaza into an open-air prison. To enforce an illegal settlement project in the territories, the Israeli military implements policies that degrade their democratic ideal further, as witnessed by the tragedy in Beit Hanoun weeks ago.

"Israelis and Palestinians are using peaceful resistance against Israeli policy. Hundreds of Palestinians assembled at a Gazan home, forcing the Israeli military to call off its planned air attack. In defiance of their government's occupation, Israeli activists seized control of tanks at a Gaza border crossing. This cross-national struggle desires a peace that only justice can nourish. The end of Israeli occupation and an overhaul of Israel's exclusionary state are prerequisites to a just solution.

"The UN General Assembly recently condemned the attacks in Gaza, but the United States vetoed a similar resolution in the Security Council, thus exerting American power to excuse its ally's atrocities. But massive American military aid also facilitates Israeli crimes.

"Our university is complicit too through its investments in arms companies that provide Israel its arsenal. Divesting from these companies would allow our campus to invest in just outcomes rooted in equality and lasting security for Israelis and Palestinians."

"-- Shimaa Abdelfadeel is an LSA senior and a co-chair of Students Allied for Freedom and Equality."

On the Web at:
http://www.michigandaily.com/home/index.cfm?event=displayArticle&ustory_id=2b7b6a66-0c4c-4627-b543-f21c5416ebc1
_____________________________________________________

# posted by Stop Crucifying Palestine @ 7:58 AM

http://stopcrucifyingpalestine.blogspot.com/2006/11/our-university-is-complicit-too.html