Politics – October 2010

Peace is not an absence of war, it is a virtue, a state of mind, a disposition for benevolence, confidence, justice.

 ~ Baruch Spinoza


Gilad is still in captivity. Veshavu banim legvulam.

At present it seems Ed Miliband better fits the Green party.

 ~Raphael Cohen-Almagor

We received hints that the IDF is searching for Gilad Shalit in Gaza. At present, it is all about good intelligence, finding the lead for Gilad’s whereabouts. At the same time, there are changes in the negotiation team. Hope this will yield good results and that Gilad will celebrate the coming Pesach at home, with his dedicated family.

In a recent poll conducted by Haaretz, Prime Minister Netanyahu received the support of 40% of the public; 47% are dissatisfied with his leadership. Minister of Defence Barak received the support of 27%; the vast majority, 62%, are dissatisfied with his performance; Minister of Foreign Affairs received the support of 34%; 54% are dissatisfied with his performance. The moderate right find Lieberman’s conduct more and more difficult.

Netanyahu is still the most popular leader in Israel. No one else is perceived to be fitter for the role. The three most important issues that embody the agenda setting for the Israeli electorate are the economy, security, and ability to reach some sort of a deal with the Palestinians.

Reflections on August-September Blog
Avigdor Lieberman
Loyalty Oath
Israel Public Opinion
Liu Xiaobo Won the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize
Iran
Free Speech Cases Top American Supreme Court Docket
Ahmad Zeid-Abadi Receives WAN-IFRA Golden Pen of Freedom
THOUGHTS ON CIVIL LIBERTY (1759)
Drug Deals in Cemetery – Advice Sought
The Most Candid Lecture I have Ever Heard in England
New Books
Movie
Monthly Poem
Light Side


Free Gilad Shalit. The government should invest in his release. It should be one of its top priorities. Veshavu banim legvulam.

Reflections on August-September Blog

From Amos Guiora, Professor of Law, University of Utah, LT COL (ret) IDF-JAG:

From 1994-1997 I served as the IDF Legal Advisor to the Gaza Strip; in that capacity I had the opportunity to work closely with Yoav Galant when he was Commander of the Gaza Strip.

I served as Galant’s Legal Advisor. In that capacity I worked intensively with Galant on a wide range of legal and policy issues relevant to operational counterterrorism, implementation of the Interim Agreement (Oslo Peace Process) in the Gaza Strip and preparing answers to petitions filed to the Israel Supreme Court (sitting as the High Court of Justice) with respect to IDF decisions in the Gaza Strip.

Galant always impressed with the following; all essential to an IDF Chief of Staff, particularly given the extraordinarily complicated dilemmas and threats facing Israel at this most complex juncture (on so many levels)

1) Willingness to listen to alternative view points;
2) Willingness to change his mind if convinced;
3) Outstanding leadership skills;
4) Ability to present in English (he worked in Alaska years ago, perhaps that helps);
5) Sure sense of self/self-confidence devoid of ‘gamesmanship’ and undue facade
6) Respect for legal parameters without cutting corners or ‘selling’ positions without intending to honor those positions.


Avigdor Lieberman

The day I sent you may latest blog, September 28, 2010, Foreign Minister Lieberman spoke at the UN with his usual sincerity, saying that there is no chance for a permanent settlement for a generation and it is necessary to "exchange" populated areas and adjust the state to its correct size. A final agreement between Israel and the Palestinians has to be based on a program of exchange of territory and populations.

In other words, as long as Lieberman in the government you can forget about any peace agreement. This is not viable.

In other words, Lieberman is declaring before the community of nations that Prime Minister Netanyahu deludes you. The “peace process” is a charade, meaningless theatre, and you President Obama, you are a fool who is wasting your time. And you, Abu Mazen, you will see the settlements growing and eating your land. Enjoy. Ahh, so good that Israel has a candid foreign minister who tells you exactly what he thinks and wants.
This is the Israeli way: Be blunt and honest about everything.

Under Lieberman's scheme, part of Israel's Arab population would be moved to a newly created Palestinians state, in return for evacuation of Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

I am sure that the 19% of Israeli-Palestinians will be delighted to hear of this proposal.
They will embrace Lieberman and rush to write letters of support.

On October 10, 2010, French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner and Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos had meetings in Jerusalem. The most memorable meeting was with their counterpart Lieberman who told them in his well-known, diplomatic way: "Before you teach us how to resolve conflicts here, I expect at the very least that you solve all the problems in Europe. Maybe then I will be open to accepting your suggestions". Lieberman also shared with them some history lessons: "In 1938 the European community decided to appease Hitler instead of supporting the loyal ally Czechoslovakia, and sacrificed it without gaining anything. We have no intention of becoming 2010's Czechoslovakia and will insist on Israel’s vital interests".

Mr. Diplomacy Lieberman also told his counterparts that the West has failed in resolving conflicts and that he does not understand why Israel was being singled out: "It seems as though the international community is trying to make up for its failure to resolve conflicts in Somalia, Afghanistan, North Korea, Zimbabwe, Sudan and other places by trying to bring about an Israeli-Palestinian agreement within a year".

According to reports, Kouchner and Moratinos heard from Netanyahu that he aspires to reach a peace agreement within a year, and the same day, two hours later, Lieberman told them that whoever thinks this way is naive.

The day Lieberman received the foreign ministry I said that he is a misfit, that Israel could not have chosen a worse representative. Lieberman confirms my worst expectations. Elephant in a china store is an understatement.

I repeat: The only way to advance with the peace process is to oust him and his party from government and welcome Kadima. I was asked whether this will guarantee that the peace wagon will move forward. True, this will not be the end of the story, as the peace camp has many opponents within the Likud, including senior ministers in Cabinet: Yaalon, Begin, Shalom (an opportunist who is now for the settlers as Bibi ignores him) plus Yishai from Shas. The majority of Bibi’s cabinet is hawkish. Is it possible to go forward? Time will tell. First we should see that Lieberman relieves the government of his presence.


Loyalty Oath

On October 10, 2010, the Israeli government approved a controversial bill that would require all non-Jews taking Israeli citizenship to swear loyalty to Israel as a "Jewish and democratic state". The law, which has angered Israel's Arab minority, still has to be passed by the Knesset. A similar measure was rejected by the cabinet in May 2009.

When Likud leader Netanyahu held negotiations with Yisrael Beitenu to compose a government, this was one of Lieberman's main demands. Netanyahu pledged that the law will pass, and now he abides by his word.

The Law’s wording: "I swear that I will be a loyal citizen to the state of Israel, as a Jewish and democratic state, and will uphold its laws."

At first, the new law was said to mainly affect Palestinians married to Israelis, foreign workers, and other special cases where people seek to be naturalised as citizens.
However, a few days later Netanyahu announced that the law will be applicable to Jews as well so that it won’t be perceived as discriminatory against Arabs. But while Jews would have little or no difficulty to make the pledge, non-Jews face substantial difficulties.

All five ministers from the left-leaning Labour party voted against the law proposal, as did three members of Netanyahu's own Likud: Benny Begin, Dan Meridor and Michael Eitan.


Israel Public Opinion

A recent poll published by Yedioth Ahronoth (October 15, 2010) showed that 63% think that Israeli Arabs should be entitled to vote. 37% wish to infringe this basic right from Arab citizens. Among religious Jews, only 42% believe Arabs should have this right.

26% wish to have a strong leader who makes decisions alone. They prefer this over democratic decision-making. Among immigrants, 53% prefer the strong leader option. The Putin syndrome is alive and well in Israel. Among religious people, 24% prefer this option.

60% of the poll thinks that Avigdor Lieberman contributes to extreme nationalism, bordering on Fascism. Elie Yishay, the Shas leader, is the second who receives such attribution with 40%. Prime Minister Netanyahu is third, with 30% who think that he contributes to extreme nationalism.

Source: Mina Zemach, "36% of Jews: Infringe Israeli-Arabs of the Right to Vote", Yedioth Ahronoth (October 15, 2010), Political Supp., p. 9.


Liu Xiaobo Won the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize

Liu Xiaobo, an impassioned literary critic, political essayist and democracy advocate repeatedly jailed by the Chinese government for his writings, won the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize in recognition of his pursuit of nonviolent political reform in China.

Mr. Liu, 54, perhaps China’s best known dissident, is currently serving an 11-year term on charges of “inciting the subversion of state power.” He is the first Chinese citizen to win the Peace Prize.

In awarding the prize to Mr. Liu, the Norwegian Nobel Committee delivered an unmistakable rebuke to Beijing’s authoritarian leaders at a time of growing intolerance for domestic dissent and spreading unease internationally over the muscular diplomacy that has accompanied China’s economic rise.

The Norwegian Nobel committee praised Liu Xiaobo for his "long and non-violent struggle for fundamental human rights in China. The ... committee has long believed that there is a close connection between human rights and peace."

Although there was no immediate response to news out of Oslo, where the prize was announced, the Chinese government in recent weeks has not been shy in describing Mr. Liu as unworthy of such an accolade. “This person was sentenced to jail because he violated Chinese law,” a Foreign Ministry spokeswoman said last week.

The prize is enormous boost for China’s beleaguered reform movement and an affirmation of the two decades Mr. Liu has spent advocating peaceful political change in the face of unremitting hostility from the ruling Chinese Community Party. Blacklisted from academia and barred from publishing in China, Mr. Liu has been harassed and detained repeatedly since 1989, when he stepped into the drama playing out on Tiananmen Square by staging a hunger strike and then negotiating the peaceful retreat of student demonstrators as thousands of soldiers stood by with rifles at the ready.

His most recent arrest in December of 2008 came a day before a reformist manifesto he helped craft began circulating on the Internet. The petition, entitled Charter ‘08, demanded that China’s rulers embrace human rights, judicial independence and the kind of political reform that would ultimately end the Communist Party’s monopoly on power.

Sources: Andrew Jacobs et al., “Chinese Dissident Awarded Nobel Peace Prize”, NY Times (October 8, 2010),
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/09/world/09nobel.html?_r=1&hp ;
Tania Branigan, “Nobel peace prize goes to Liu Xiaobo”, The Guardian (October 8, 2010),
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/08/nobel-peace-prize-liu-xiaobo


Free Speech Cases Top American Supreme Court Docket

First Amendment cases top the Supreme Court's docket as it begins a new term with a new justice and three women on the bench for the first time.

The court will look at provocative anti-gay protests at military funerals and a California law banning the sale of violent video games to children. These cases worry free speech advocates, who fear the court could limit First Amendment freedoms.

Another case involves a different aspect of the First Amendment, the government's relationship to religion. The justices will decide whether Arizona's income tax credit scholarship program, in essence, directs state money to religious schools in violation of the constitutional separation of church and state.

Under Chief Justice John Roberts, marking his fifth anniversary on the court, and with the replacement of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor by Justice Samuel Alito, the court has been more sympathetic to arguments that blur the line between government and religion, as long as one religion is not favoured over another.

The newly appointed Justice Elena Kagan will not sit on 24 of the 51 cases the court has so far agreed to hear. The former Obama's solicitor general solicitor is required to abstain from hearing those cases.

Kagan's absences create the potential for the eight remaining justices to split 4-4 in some cases. That outcome leaves in place the decision reached by the most recent court to have the case, but leaves unsettled the issue the high court was set to resolve.

A second Arizona law, imposing penalties on businesses that hire illegal immigrants, also is before the court this term. At issue is whether the state law intrudes into an area, immigration, that really is the federal government's responsibility.

Several cases that pit consumers against business also revolve around when federal law trumps state action. In one case, parents of a child who suffered severe, lasting damage from a vaccine want to use state law to sue a drugmaker, even though Congress has established a special court to hear disputes over vaccines.

Wal-Mart Stores Inc., backed by many business groups, wants the court to toss out an enormous class-action sex discrimination suit over allegations that it pays women less than men and promotes women less frequently. The case could involve millions of women who once worked at the world's largest private employer.

Source: AP,
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jvMx2oamMT74rmWmaVIrDkQf7UCgD9IJR1D80?docId=D9IJR1D80&om_rid=EI4aJV&om_mid=_BMqID6B8VBlF5C


Ahmad Zeid-Abadi Receives WAN-IFRA Golden Pen of Freedom

An Iranian journalist who was imprisoned following Iran's disputed presidential election last year has been awarded the 2010 Golden Pen of Freedom, the annual press freedom prize of the World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers (WANIFRA).

Ahmad Zeid-Abadi, who is serving a six-year prison sentence, was honoured during a ceremony at the opening of the World Editors Forum for "his courageous actions in the face of persecution and for his outstanding contribution to the defence and promotion of press freedom."

Mr Zeid-Abadi was among at least 110 journalists arrested following the disputed reelection of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in June 2009. At least 23 remain behind bars, about a fifth of all journalists imprisoned world-wide.

"Though we honour Mr Zeid-Abadi here today, it is also important to remember the other jailed journalists, the ones who don't win awards but nevertheless suffer under despotic regimes," said Xavier Vidal-Folch, President of the World Editors Forum, who presented the award. "We should never forget them and we in the international newspaper community should do our utmost to win their release."

The award was accepted on behalf of Mr Zeid-Abadi by Akbar Ganji, the 2006 Golden Pen laureate who had also been imprisoned by the Iranian regime.

"Iran today is under the occupation of a band of deceitful liars," Mr Ganji said, at times breaking into tears during the ceremony. "The occupying regime of the Shi¹i clerics has targeted the moral foundation of the society and is determined to portray moral vices as virtues. Usually foreign occupiers occupy a country territorially. But these occupiers have targeted the dignity and integrity of a nation. In what these people in position of power do there is not a trace of commitment to ethics, propriety, or truthfulness."

Mr Ganji's full speech can be found at
http://www.wan-press.org/article18668.html .

Mr Vidal-Folch's can be read at
http://www.wan-press.org/article18669.html .

Ahmad Zeid-Abadi, an academic and political commentator as well as a journalist, is known for an open letter he wrote from prison in 2000 protesting the judiciary's treatment of imprisoned journalists. The letter was widely distributed despite attempts by the authorities to suppress its publication.

Mr Zeid-Abadi, the former chief editor of the Azad newspaper and a contributor to the Tehran-based daily Hamshahari and the BBC Persian service, was among dozens of journalists who were systematically rounded up and detained following the disputed presidential election in June 2009. He was tried in August 2009, along with more than 40 other journalists and 100 prominent supporters of the country's pro-reform movement, on charges of plotting to overthrow the clerical theocracy with a "soft revolution." He was sentenced to six years in prison, five years in internal exile and a lifetime writing ban.

"Ahmad Zeid-Abadi languishes in an Iranian prison, held under appalling conditions, merely for the crime of doing a job that most of us in this room do without fear of intimidation, attack, imprisonment or even death," Mr Vidal-Folch said to the more than 500 chief editors and journalists gathered for the annual World Editors Forum.

Mr Zeid-Abadi has been in and out of prison since 2000. In an interview following his imprisonment nearly a decade ago, Mr Zeid-Abadi described conditions in Evin prison this way: "The desperation they create in prison is so bad you think it's the end of the world. The criminals use rape, especially with newcomers. And when you're taken everywhere blindfolded and hear horrible, scary screams, and you are put in a tiny cell, you have the feeling that you will never see normal life again.

In presenting the award, WAN-IFRA and the World Editors Forum again called for the release of all jailed journalists in Iran.

The Golden Pen of Freedom is the annual award made by WAN-IFRA to recognize the outstanding actions, in writing and deed, of an individual, a group or an institution in the case of press freedom.

Past winners of the Golden Pen, awarded annually since 1961, include Argentina's Jacobo Timerman (1980), South Africa's Anthony Heard (1986), Vietnam's Doan Viet Hoat (1998), Zimbabwe's Geoffrey Nyarota (2002), and China's Shi Tao (2007) and Li Changqing (2008). The 2009 laureate is Najam Sethi of Pakistan. A full list of laureates can be found at http://www.wan-press.org/article4489.html

Source: http://persian2english.com/?p=15007


THOUGHTS ON CIVIL LIBERTY (1759)

The first-ever English translation of the 1759 Swedish language pamphlet, Tankar om Borgerliga Friheten, translated as Thoughts on Civil Liberty, has recently been published. Tankar was written by the Finnish-Swede Peter Forsskal. He is well-known as one of Linnaeus´ "disciples" and for his botanical discoveries whilst part of an expedition to Egypt, the Red Sea and Yemen. He died there in 1763 aged 32.

Until now, though, his contribution to political thought and the literature of the Enlightenment has lain hidden, inaccessible to all but a very few Swedish scholars.

Uppsala University did not permit Forsskal to defend the pamphlet’s text as a thesis because he wanted it published in Swedish as well as Latin. So, he went around the University and approached a publisher in Stockholm, Lars Salvius. The version printed by Salvius was the censored one, owing to Forsskal’s plea for freedom to publish - even if the content offended the religious authorities’ sensibilities.

So, Linneaus was ordered to retrieve and destroy all the (500) copies that Forsskal brought with him to Uppsala. It seems as if Linneaus did comply with the order, but without too much diligence, and only 79 copies were found.

This publication reprints and uses the uncensored version, located in the Swedish National Archives. The work was published by Atlantis Bok (Stockholm) during October 2009, and launched at an event in the Old Parliament in Stockholm on November 18th 2009.

The book is complemented by a (beta) website, http://www.peterforsskal.com/

A German language translation of Tankar is available there, as well as a specially commissioned French translation. Russian and Spanish translations will follow soon. Discussions about a Swedish-Arabic translation are ongoing.

Forsskal’s pamphlet is an almost unknown, but a significant contribution to Enlightenment literature, in particular from an area of Europe that is not so much neglected as impenetrable because so much of the literature remains un-translated. Although there is no entry for Forsskal in the Oxford Encyclopedia of the Enlightenment, its Editor-in-Chief has written (privately) that “Forsskal's work should occupy a major place in the history of liberty.”

To purchase the book, click on http://www.peterforsskal.com/buy

On 23rd November 2010, the second annual Forsskal Symposium will be held at Uppsala Law School in the room dedicated to him there.

Please contact David Goldberg, the project co-ordinator, for any information, comments and the etc. <davgoldberg@gmail.com>


Drug Deals in Cemetery – Advice Sought

Dr Judy Stone from the USA asked me to post this, seeking your advice. Please forward comments to me and I will post them on my next Newsletter.

I wanted to let you know about something creepy that happened Sunday...and am hoping you might give me some direction.

I wandered out to Mt. Lebanon cemetery (Adelphi Rd) this afternoon to visit my folks and ran into a disturbing situation--I believe it was probably a drug deal--in an adjacent section. After a call to the PG police and the Mt Lebanon people, and then talking with Heather's roommate briefly, it seems that on the weekends or after hours, this is not a good place to visit alone like I did. I was told there is a fair amount of gang activity around there as well. Although nothing happened, the incident was disturbing on a variety of levels.

I was totally taken off guard by this encounter and didn't want others to find themselves in a similar situation...

I just spoke to the cemetery manager, whose major suggestion was not visiting alone (like that is real easy to do...and shouldn't be necessary). I suggested that they consider some sort of surveillance system and alert families about safety issues. I also suggested they should perhaps rotate their staff's hours so they have a presence during the hours people are likely to visit their loved ones.
I would hate to have someone killed there just from naivete. I am also sickened at the thought of gangs desecrating graves, but particularly as there are Holocaust survivors buried there.

Any suggestions about making them more responsible for safeguarding both the graves and the visitors would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.


The Most Candid Lecture I have Ever Heard in England

On October 5, 2010 I heard the most candid lecture I have ever heard in England. For a moment, it reminded me of Israel... The lecturer, Sir Andrew Motion, a distinguished poet on his own right, spoke of his friendship with Philip Larkin, who is considered as one of the greatest post-WWII poets of England. Larkin was also the Hull librarian for many years, one of the most important figures Hull has ever produced. The lecture started calmly, when Motion spoke of himself and what Larkin meant for him as a young boy. Motion decided to apply for a job in Hull in order to meet Larkin. He got the job, came to Hull, met Larkin. A beautiful friendship developed between them. So far so good.

Motion gave hints of what is ahead when he described Larkin, his home, his life. But that was nothing compared to the real things that came about. Larkin made Motion his literary executor, in charge of all that he left behind. And Larkin had left quite a bit, including very personal letters and diaries. Motion wrote a very revealing biography of Larkin (Larkin: A Writer's Life, http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/m/andrewmotion/philip-larkin.htm). I have not read it. Until this lecture, I knew very little about Larkin. I only read some of his poetry. I teach in a building that carries his name. His name flies about in the university quite often. But I knew very little about Larkin’s personal life.

Now I know. I would not have liked to meet him.

What a guy!! An egomaniac, misogynist, racist, exploiter, insensitive, drunk person. Larkin detested children, and coldly played women friends off against one another in order to preserve his solitude. Larkin liked to drink, Thatcher and pornography. And he adored himself.

What a lecture. What candour. I never heard such a thing here. In England, it is all about subtlety, reading in between the lines; what is not said is often more important than what is said; a language of understatements. And suddenly this!!

I came to Sir Andrew at the end of his talk and told him this was the most candid lecture I have ever heard in England. He asked: Where are you from? Israel, I said. Well, he answered smiling, you know something about candidness. Right, I said.

I asked him: Did you love him? Motion said in the lecture that he loves Larkin’s poetry. They were very close friends. Motion answered: I thought it was clear about my affection to Larkin.

I asked: Did you discover anything you did not know after Larkin’s death? Was there anything that came to you as a surprise? He said: Yes, many things. I knew some things, but all became clear upon reading his material.

See http://www.open2.net/historyandthearts/arts/motion_on_larkin.html
http://www.poetryarchive.org/poetryarchive/singlePoet.do?poetId=7076
http://www.contemporarywriters.com/authors/?p=auth76


New Books

Richard Bellamy and Antonio Palumbo (eds.), Public Ethics (London: Ashgate, 2010).

Richard Bellamy and Antonio Palumbo (eds.), Political Accountability (London: Ashgate, 2010).

These are two compilations of already published articles on two important subject areas. In two volumes the reader finds some of the most important literature on public ethics and political accountability. These are rich and diverse, with articles of the highest quality that were published in some of the most distinguished forums in the world.

Political realists are accustomed to argue that ethical considerations had no place in
 public affairs. This is always a debatable view - not least because realism habitually employed a crude utilitarian morality rather than being totally amoral - ethical considerations have played an ever more prominent role in the thinking and actions of policy makers and politicians. Increasingly citizens expect policies not only to be efficient and effective according to some purely economic or prudential calculation, but also to be equitable and just in certain respects as well. Both the private and the public morality of politicians and public officials have come under ever greater scrutiny, with their actions being examined for their moral consistency and probity. They are expected to be procedurally correct, refraining from bias and partiality, and to respect particular moral side constraints, notably human rights considerations. The essays collected together in this volume explore how far these are reasonable expectations. Starting with the classic debates on dirty hands, they discuss the degree to which it is possible to either clean up politicians or politics.

http://www.amazon.de/Public-Ethics-Library-Contemporary-Political/dp/0754628094/ref=sr_1_3/279-4671435-7501816?ie=UTF8&s=books-intlde&qid=1280502617&sr=1-3

Political accountability forms a cornerstone of modern democracy: it directs the political system towards the public interest and allows the exercise of the principles of autonomy and self-determination that lie at the core of democratic politics. Sadly, actual existing democracies, with their large, centralized bureaucracies, have evolved in ways that progressively undermine the ability of citizens to keep their representatives accountable and political regimes responsive. Far from reversing this trend, the neoliberal reforms introduced since the 1980s have increased that accountability gap. Globalization and the alleged passage from 'government' to 'governance' have, if anything, aggravated the problem further. The notion of accountability that survives these changes is a problematic form of auditing carried out by a constellation of Quangos, autonomous agencies and NGOs whose own accountability is problematic. This volume collects the main contributions to current debates on political accountability. It explores the challenges traditional conventions of accountability face today at the domestic, trans- and international levels and indicates the distinctive solutions those challenges require.

http://www.amazon.de/Political-Accountability-Library-Contemporary-Essays/dp/075462806X/ref=sr_1_2/279-4671435-7501816?ie=UTF8&s=books-intlde&qid=1280502617&sr=1-2

For further information, see http://www.ucl.ac.uk/spp/people/richardbellamy/LCEPTPP_series.pdf

I am most grateful to Ashgate for copies of these two excellent volumes.


Movie

Shooting dogs 2004

This film is about the Rwanda genocide in 1994. Specifically it is about deep-seated fear turned into murderous hatred, and about the failings of UN peace monitoring forces. The film tells the true story of one single school run by a Catholic priest which the UN turned into their compound. When violence broke out, some 2500 Tutsis found refuge in the compound. Outside were waiting large numbers of incited mobs with machetes ready to kill. Outside genocide was carried out. The UN and the world at large knew about this and did not care. Yet again, the world turned a blind eye to horrific events and allowed them to happen. Then one day the UN captain received an order to evacuate his small force from the compound and retreat to the airport knowing full well what will happen the moment they leave. Instead of sending troops to stop the genocide, the UN deserted the people who came for their help.

This film is one of the few films made about the terrible genocide in central Africa. Yet again we witnessed the power of words, of the well-designed incitement against the Tutsis, portraying them as cockroaches that need to be destroyed; stripping them of human identity and legitimising their merciless massacre by happily knifing Hutus. Some lessons of the Nazi regime were learned in Africa. Yet again we witnessed what can happen to normal law-abiding citizens when they are brain-washed and authorised by their government to kill their perceived enemy. How happy they are leaving their normal daily life to participate in the blood-bath. This film will shake you, move you, startle you because you know reality exceeds imagination; what you see actually had happened and no one cared.


Monthly Poem

Autumn

Thou comest, Autumn, heralded by the rain,
With banners, by great gales incessant fanned,
Brighter than brightest silks of Samarcand,
And stately oxen harnessed to thy wain!
Thou standest, like imperial Charlemagne,
Upon thy bridge of gold; thy royal hand
Outstretched with benedictions o'er the land,
Blessing the farms through all thy vast domain!
Thy shield is the red harvest moon, suspended
So long beneath the heaven's o'er-hanging eaves;
Thy steps are by the farmer's prayers attended;
Like flames upon an altar shine the sheaves;
And, following thee, in thy ovation splendid,
Thine almoner, the wind, scatters the golden leaves!
Henry Wadsworth Longfellow


Light Side

To keep all happy, two versions of the same joke (?).
1.
For sale: Encyclopedia Britannica. 25 volumes in excellent condition. $1500 or best offer.
I got married last week. My wife knows it all.

2.
For sale: Encyclopedia Britannica. 25 volumes in excellent condition. $1500 or best offer.
I got married last week. My husband knows it all.


Peace and love. Have a warm and cosy winter.

Yours as ever,

Rafi

My last communications are available on http://almagor.blogspot.com/
Earlier posts at my home page: http://hcc.haifa.ac.il/~rca/
People wishing to subscribe to this Monthly Newsletter are welcome to e-mail me at r.cohen-almagor@hull.ac.uk

Politics – August-September 2010

Many Israelis believe that vis á vis the Palestinians what does not work with force will work with more force. Many Palestinians believe that vis á vis the Israelis what does not work with force will work with more force. The bloody result is inescapable.


Gilad is still in captivity. Veshavu banim legvulam.

    ~Raphael Cohen-Almagor


The last month has been dominated by a few notable events: First, the Turkel Committee designed to investigate the Gaza flotilla which ended with the killing of nine people on one of the Turkish ships. In the first week, Prime Minister Netanyahu, Defence Minister Barak and Chief of Staff Ashkenazi gave their testimonies. The Committee, no doubt, will do serious work. Don't hold your breath, though.

Common sense does prevail and the government agreed to take part in the international investigative committee that was established to investigate the same flotilla incident.
Turkey, I assume, will also have to deduce some lessons.

Second, the Chief of Staff nomination process. Six months before Ashkenazi is scheduled to complete his term, Ehud Barak decided to start looking for a worthy successor. It was widely known who this successor will be, General Yoav Galant, but Barak played the game and interviewed five candidates. However, one of the candidates or someone who did not wish Galant in office interfered in the process. More details below.

Third, the government decided to take action against the guest workers who illegally remain in the country after their term ends. 400 children of guest workers are destined for deportation. They constitute a grave demographic threat to the Jewish character of the State.

Reflections on July Newsletter
General Yoav Galant
The Washington Peace Summit
Egypt
Tony Blair
Iraq
Iran
Report on the Gaza Flotilla
Fidel Castro on Anti-Semitism
Honour Killing
Child Abuse and the Catholic Church
USA School Education 2010
George Soros’ Donation to Human Rights Watch
New Books
New Article
Israeli Summer
LIFE in Israel in 1948
Gem of the Month – The Moody Blues
Movie
Monthly Poem
Light Side

Free Gilad Shalit. The government should invest in his release. It should be one of its top priorities. Veshavu banim legvulam.



Reflections on July Newsletter

From Art Hobson, Professor Emeritus of Physics, U Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas,
USA

Hi Rafi –
I agree that "If Israel goes down, we all go down." I also agree with Mr. Aznar that the threat to the world from Islamic fundamentalism is enormous. But beyond these important points of agreement, I disagree with much of Aznar's essay. I especially disagree with his notion that we must defend Israel because Israel is a "fundamental part of the West", and that "The West is what it is thanks to its Judeo-Christian roots."
Indeed, it is not simply Islam but all of western religion, including our own "Judeo-Christian roots," that forms much of the problem in the Mideast and elsewhere.
Irrational fundamentalism--including Christian, Jewish, and Islamic fundamentalists--is the real problem. By "fundamentalists" I mean those who accept their holy books as literal (rather than metaphorical) truth. These people are the real enemy.

Prime Minister Netanyahu's hard-line policies are not in Israel's interests, nor are they in the U.S.'s or the world's interests. It is precisely because "If Israel goes down, we all go down" that President Obama should speak forcefully to Netanyahu, telling him that U.S. aid to Israel will be gradually withdrawn unless Israel establishes a full freeze on new settlements in all Israeli-occupied territories. It is precisely because "If Israel goes down, we all go down" that Israel must proceed as rapidly as possible to a real settlement with the Palestinians. The outlines of a peace settlement have been  clear for years: Israel must give up its settlements, including East Jerusalem, and the Palestinians must give up the right of return to their pre-1947 lands in present-day Israel.
Jerusalem must be shared, probably under international protection. Some Israeli settlements could be retained by swapping them for Israeli land or allowances for some Palestinians to return to their pre-1947 homes. Both sides have hinted that a deal along these lines is possible. Anything less than this cannot work. Without such a real and workable peace, I fear that indeed Israel and the rest of us will go down.

Take care, my friend. – Art

General Yoav Galant

The nomination process of a new Chief of Staff tends to be complicated and difficult.
This is due to the zeal of the nominees, and the relationships between each of them and the Minister of Defence who nominates them, and the latter’s relationship with the Prime Minister who sometimes has his/her own agenda and interests that do not
necessarily coincide with those of the Defence Minister. Ehud Barak has a difficult
relationship with the present Chief of Staff, Gabi Ashkenazi. Ashkenazi is scheduled to complete his four-year term in six months time. The nomination process should not be too long. There are five candidates. Barak needs to interview them, decide, speak with the Prime Minister, approve the nominee in government and Israel has a new Chief of Staff. How long does this process take? Well, it depends. If you wish it to be quick, a week. If you wish to prolong it, a long time.

Barak did not wish to prolong the process. He did wish to cripple Ashkenazi. Thus, he started the process six months ahead of time. Once the identity of the new Chief of Staff is revealed, Ashkenazi becomes a lame duck. All eyes are set on the new man, and no substantive decisions can be made by the old guy. As said, there were five candidates but all who know something about Israeli politics knew that essentially there was only one candidate: Yoav Galant.

Barak interviewed two of the candidates and then, on August 6, a document was leaked to the media carrying the signature of Galant. In this document, Galant maps a plan how to improve his chances, “complimenting” his rivals and Chief of Staff Ashkenazi. Why should a leading candidate smear his opponents and Ashkenazi, and leak the document to the media? It did not make any sense.

Galant denied any connection to the document, saying it was forged. The public relations company that was said to have prepared the strategy, whose logo appeared on the document, denied any connection. At this point, it became clear that someone
concocted the document to damage and undermine Galant. But Barak had to wait until
the police had completed its investigation. Finally the police concluded that “There is no basis to suspect Defense Minister Ehud Barak and IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi of being involved in drawing up the document,” adding that all of the major candidates for the position of chief of General Staff have also been cleared of involvement.

Immediately after the police finalized its investigation, Barak interviewed the three remaining candidates and the following day announced that Maj. Gen. Yoav Galant will be the next Chief of Staff. Maj.-Gen. Gadi Eizencot was offered to become his deputy.
Eizencot and Galant like one another as a cat likes a parrot. Eizencot gracefully declined and said he prefers to continue his role as commander of the north. The present Chief of Staff Deputy Maj. Gen. Benny Gantz may retire, while the future of Maj.-Gen. Avi Mizrahi and the IDF attach? in Washington, Gadi Shamni, remains unclear. They are likely to remain in the army. They wanted to put their signatures ahead for the next round of nominations.



Galant, 51, will be the first chief of staff to come from the navy, which he joined in 1977. He started his army career with Shayetet 13, the navy's elite platoon. He showed his strategic thinking by later moving to the green land forces. He was appointed commander of the Jenin Brigade in 1993. Galant then returned to the navy to command the Shayetet, but after some time left the navy for good when he was appointed commander of the Gaza Division. In 2001, he was appointed deputy head of the Ground Forces Command; a year later he received the rank of major general and began working alongside then-prime minister Ariel Sharon as his military secretary. Again, a strategic move that paid him well. Galant was well liked and appreciated by PM Sharon, and entered the elite circle of Israeli politicians. In 2005, after the disengagement from the Gaza Strip, Galant took over as head of the Southern Command. In 2008-9, he commanded Operation Cast Lead which he planned and directed. During these later years he became close to Defence Minister Barak, who grew to like and appreciate him.

So what do we know about the new chief of staff? I emphasized his strategic thinking.
He knows how to map and analyze opportunities on the personal and army levels. He
has analytic thinking. People who know him describe Galant as Melach Haaretz, literally meaning in Hebrew "salt of the earth", a genuine man who is fully committed to the idea of Zionist Israel and has dedicated his life to secure Israel and fortify its existence.
Galant has little life outside the army. He is a full-fledged army person.

Operation Cast Lead reveals Galant’s capabilities. If you recall my analysis of the
operation, I said that the operation was guided by the following principles: Minimize casualties on the Israeli side; avoid direct confrontations; by no means allow another Gilad Shalit – no Israeli soldier should fall in the hands of the enemy; destroy the enemy.

These same principles guide many army commanders across the globe in many military
operations – past, present and future. Galant is an army man. As said, he dedicates his life to the army and is very good in what he is doing. That also means very little compassion for the enemy. The result, as we all know, was about 1400 dead on the Palestinian side; 13 dead on the Israeli side.


The Washington Peace Summit

Many asked me what I think of the peace summit. Well, I am not too hopeful. I wish I prove to be grossly wrong, I wish reality will crash my pessimism. But I cannot see peace at this juncture.



Photo: http://www.france24.com/en/20100902-mubarak-urges-netanyahu-act-peacechance- 0


Peace is a very precious commodity. It demands many sacrifices on both sides. Such a momentous moment in history will happen in the culmination of ripe circumstances,
and strong-willed leaders who are fully committed to the idea of peace. At present, I do not think the circumstances are ripe, and I do not think that both Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Abbas are fully committed to peace. Both of them lack the will and the capability to reach peace.

Again, I wish I am very wrong, but listening to the opening statements of both leaders reveal the wide gaps between the two. Netanyahu said that we withdrew from Lebanon, and what did we get in return? Terror sponsored by Iran. We withdrew from Gaza and what did we get? Iranian-sponsored terror. Israel must insist on preserving its security.
What does it mean? All the things that the Palestinian dread and wish to dismantle: the Fence; checkpoints; settlements; army presence.

Abbas spoke of borders, Jerusalem, water, the right of return, checkpoints, settlements, the well-known bones of contention. President Obama delineates a one-year process. I am afraid it will take more than a year.

See text http://sdjewishworld.wordpress.com/2010/09/01/comments-by-obamanetanyahu- mubarak-abdullah-and-abbas-at-start-of-peace-talks/

The moment Netanyahu will be true to peace, Lieberman will withdraw from the coalition. This might not be the end of the Netanyahu government as he can welcome
Kadima. I will be less pessimistic if this will happen. Labour will remain in coalition now that the peace boat has anchored.

So here is a sign for you: As long as Lieberman is part of the coalition, it is all about words, hyper words, pleasantries, void words. If Lieberman leaves the government, then Israel’s real test will begin as heavy sacrifices are demanded.

I watched President Obama closely: He looks tired. I think the job demands a great deal from him, probably more than he expected and wished for. Obama made many rocky mistakes that had their toll on him. His handling of the economy crisis is not satisfactory. He aroused too many opponents against him on the Capitol and other centers of powers. His Middle East policy is questionable. In some parts of the USA he is perceived as a liability for some Democrat candidates. Obama is fighting far too many fronts at the same time, and still does not fully understand how to conduct his affairs vis-a-vis the media. I repeat what I wrote in the past: Obama and his team should study closely how Prime Minister Sharon dealt with the media. By then, the experienced Sharon was no longer blinded by the media specter and knew how to mobilize them to serve his best interests. Obama understands slowly that extensive media exposure burns you, not flatters you. The President of the United States is not a media producer.
Instead, he is the most beautiful girl in town who should be courted after, keep her life private, and maintain her glamour like the mysterious Mona-Lisa smile.

The economy, Afghanistan, Iran, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and addressing ad hoc matters as they pop up, this should be Obama’s order of things.


Egypt

According to recent reports, Hosni Mubarak, the 82 year-old long serving president of Egypt is struggling with incurable cancer. I watched him in the Washington summit and Mubarak looked reasonably well. But he is no longer the strong man he was. Mubarak, who succeeded Anwar Sadat after the latter was assassinated in 1981, provided much needed stability for the newly built peace relationships between Israel and Egypt. For the past few years he has designated his son Gamal to be his successor.



Israel should prepare for the next era. As far as it is possible to judge, if Gamal will secure his father’s position the relationships between the two countries will be more of the same. Hosni took good care to see that Gamal understands his legacy and preserves it.


Tony Blair

The same evening of September 2, 2010, just prior to the opening of the peace summit in Washington DC I watched Tony Blair’s interview on the BBC, this on the occasion of the publication of his memoirs. You may not agree with all he says, but Blair always strikes me as a genuine and courageous leader, true to himself and to his conscience, with a strong sense of direction, belief in what he is doing, a man of ideas and ability to execute them, a doer. He gained my utmost appreciation during his terms in office and continues to have my appreciation in his various roles he assumed since then, mainly in his efforts to bring European ideas to the Middle East and some sanity to that part of the world that believes that the power of the sword is the answer to everything. This belief, I am sorry to say, is shared by both Palestinians and Israelis, with known, bloody results.




Blair believes he had taken the right decision to oust Saddam Hussein and to enter the Bush war coalition. He expresses sympathies and appreciation to the soldiers and their families who pay the highest possible price. He calls upon the world to take similar positions today regarding Iran, as he believes nuclear Iran constitutes a grave threat to the safety of the free world. The West cannot tolerate such a scenario and should resort to arms, if necessary, to prevent the Iranian bomb. I cannot agree more.


Iraq

Now that the coalition forces are leaving Iraq, guess who will come in.


Iran

Iran’s behaviour reminds me of Iraq’s under Saddam. The UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) says Iran has hindered its investigations by repeatedly objecting to the agency's choice of inspectors. The nuclear watchdog cannot confirm that Iran's nuclear programme is peaceful. Iran is continuing to produce low-enriched uranium, despite fresh UN Security Council sanctions. Those sanctions are insufficient to deter Iran or to convince its leaders to change their ways.


Bushehr Nuclear Power Station. Photo: BBC

Meanwhile, Tehran insists its nuclear programme is solely for energy production, and its Russian ally confirms this is the case. The free world has many reasons to suspect Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons.

The IAEA said Iran had produced around 2.8 tonnes of low-enriched uranium. This uranium may be used for peaceful purposes. It might be used for violent purposes.
Should the free world take its chances and allow Iran to reach the point of no return?
The IAEA's consistent reports are most troubling to all who care about nonproliferation and global security.

I presume Israel and the USA are discussing all these concerns at the moment. Some more time is available to press the Iranians. But if they remain adamant, Israel will attack. The cycle of violence will widen with grave consequences not only to the region but to the world at large.


Report on the Gaza Flotilla

As you know, my criticism of Cast Lead and of the Gaza blockade is not about the logic: Israel has every right to protect its citizens. No sovereign state should stand idly by while its enemies aim to destroy it. No state should allow rockets being fired into its territory.

The issue is not about the moral and legal right but about the means pursuing that end. It is about proportionality. It is about inflicting indiscriminate suffering and insensitivity. It is about preserving the basic human rights of your enemy.

Not all Gazans are terrorists. Not all Gazans should be subject to arbitrary and
indiscriminate fire and punishment. Israel, however, thinks that because Gazans elected Hamas, all deserve to be punished. There has been very little compassion in its actions.

Israel’s actions have been subjected to international scrutiny for good reasons.
And here comes another blow. Behaving like the neighbourhood bully does not pay dividends. It undermines Israel’s position in the community of nations and harms its relationships with friendly and not-so-friendly countries. Israel’s enemies rejoice and celebrate the mistakes Israel is making and wish its decision-makers many long years in power.

The report of the international fact-finding mission to investigate violations of
international law, including international humanitarian and human rights law, resulting from the Israeli attacks on the flotilla of ships carrying humanitarian assistance, was published on September 22, 2010. Here is its summary, reflections and major findings. I will be happy to email the full report to interested parties.

This report was prepared by the fact-finding mission established by the Human Rights Council in resolution A/HRC/RES/14/1 of 2 June 2010 to investigate violations of international law, including international humanitarian law and human rights law, resulting from the interception by Israeli forces of the humanitarian aid flotilla bound for Gaza on 31 May 2010 during which nine people were killed and many others injured.

The report sets out background information relating to the interception of the flotilla as well as the applicable international law. The fact-finding mission conducted interviews with more than 100 witnesses in Geneva, London, Istanbul and Amman. On the basis of this testimony and other information received, the Mission was able to reconstruct a picture of the circumstances surrounding the interception on 31 May 2010 and its aftermath. The report presents a factual description of the events leading up to the interception, the interception of each of the six ships in the flotilla as well as a seventh ship subsequently intercepted on 6 June 2010, the deaths of nine passengers and wounding of many others and the detention of passengers in Israel and their deportation.

The report contains a legal analysis of facts as determined by the Mission with a view to determining whether violations of international law, including international humanitarian and human rights law, took place.

The fact-finding mission concluded that a series of violations of international law, including international humanitarian and human rights law, were committed by the Israeli forces during the interception of the flotilla and during the detention of passengers in Israel prior to deportation.

Together with the Mission, I express my profound regret that the position of the Israeli government was one of non-recognition of and non-cooperation with the Mission. The Israeli government believes that non-cooperation better serves its interests. I beg to differ.

Under the laws of armed conflict, a blockade is the prohibition of all commerce with a defined enemy coastline. A belligerent who has established a lawful blockade is entitled to enforce that blockade on the high seas. A blockade must satisfy a number of legal requirements, including: notification, effective and impartial enforcement and proportionality. In particular a blockade is illegal if: (a) it has the sole purpose of starving the civilian population or denying it other objects essential for its survival; or (b) the damage to the civilian population is, or may be expected to be, excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated from the blockade.

A blockade may not continue to be enforced where it inflicts disproportionate damage on the civilian population. The usual meaning of “damage to the civilian population” refers to deaths, injuries and property damage. Here the damage may be thought of as the destruction of the civilian economy and prevention of reconstruction of past damage.

In evaluating the evidence submitted to the Mission, including by the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs in the occupied Palestinian territory, confirming the severe humanitarian situation in Gaza, the destruction of the economy and the prevention of reconstruction, the Mission is satisfied that the blockade was inflicting disproportionate damage upon the civilian population in the Gaza Strip and as such the interception could not be justified and therefore has to be considered illegal.

Moreover, the Mission emphasises that according to article 33 of the Fourth Geneva
Convention, collective punishment of civilians under occupation is prohibited.

Given the evidence at the Turkel Committee, it is clear that there was no reasonable suspicion that the Flotilla posed any military risk of itself. As a result, no case could be made to intercept the vessels in the exercise of belligerent rights or Article 51 selfdefence.
Thus, no case can be made for the legality of the interception and the Mission
therefore finds that the interception was illegal.

Events on board the M.V. Mavi Marmara
(i) Initial attempt to board the Mavi Marmara from the sea
112. Israeli zodiac boats made a first attempt to board the Mavi Marmara from the sea shortly before 0430 hours. Several zodiac boats approached the ship at the stern from both the port and starboard sides. The approach was accompanied by the firing of nonlethal weaponry onto the ship, including smoke and stun grenades, tear-gas and paintballs. Plastic bullets may also have been used at this stage: however, despite some claims that live ammunition was also fired from the zodiac boats, the Mission is not satisfied that this was the case. The smoke and tear gas were not effective due to the strong sea breeze and later due to the downdraft from helicopters.

113. The Israeli forces attempted to board the ship through attaching ladders to the hull. Passengers engaged in efforts to repel the attempted boarding using the ship’s water hoses and the throwing of various items at the boats including chairs, sticks, a box of plates and other objects that were readily at hand. This initial attempt to board the ship proved unsuccessful. It is the view of the Mission that the Israeli forces should have re-evaluated their plans when it became obvious that putting their soldiers on board the ship may lead to civilian casualties.

(ii) Landing of soldiers from helicopters onto the Mavi Marmara

114. Just minutes after soldiers from the zodiac boats had made initial unsuccessful attempts to board, the first helicopter approached the ship at approximately 0430 hours, hovering above the top deck. At this point between 10 and 20 passengers were located in the central area of the top deck, although this number increased as other passengers learned of events on the top deck. The Israeli forces used smoke and stun grenades in an attempt to clear an area for the landing of soldiers. The first rope that was let down from the helicopter was taken by passengers and tied it to a part of the top deck and thereby rendered ineffective for the purpose of soldiers’ descent. A second rope was then let down from the helicopter and the first group of soldiers descended.
The Mission does not find it plausible that soldiers were holding their weapons and firing as they descended on the rope. However, it has concluded that live ammunition was used from the helicopter onto the top deck prior to the descent of the soldiers.

115. With the available evidence it is difficult to delineate the exact course of events on the top deck between the time of the first soldier descending and the Israeli forcessecuring control of the deck. A fight ensued between passengers and the first soldiers to descend onto the top deck that resulted in at least two soldiers being pushed down onto the bridge deck below, where they were involved in struggles with groups of passengers who attempted to take their weapons. The equipment jacket of at least one soldier was removed as he was pushed over the side of the deck. A number of weapons were taken from the soldiers by passengers and thrown into the sea: one weapon, a 9mm pistol was unloaded by a passenger, a former US Marine, in front of witnesses and then hidden in another part of the ship in an attempt to retain evidence.


Photo: IDF

116. A number of the passengers on the top deck fought with the soldiers using their fists, sticks, metal rods and knives. At least one of the soldiers was stabbed with a knife or other sharp object. Witnesses informed the Mission that their objective was to subdue and disarm the soldiers so that they could not harm anyone. The Mission is satisfied on the evidence that at least two passengers on the bridge deck also used handheld catapults to propel small projectiles at the helicopters. The Mission has found no evidence to suggest that any of the passengers used firearms or that any firearms were taken on board the ship. Despite requests, the Mission has not received any medical records or other substantiated information from the Israeli authorities regarding any firearm injuries sustained by soldiers participating in the raid. Doctors examined the three soldiers taken below decks and no firearm injuries were noted. Further, the Mission finds that the Israeli accounts so inconsistent and contradictory with regard to evidence of alleged firearms injuries to Israeli soldiers that it has to reject it.

Deaths of nine passengers and wounding of at least 50 other passengers

117. During the operation to secure control of the top deck, the Israeli forces landed soldiers from three helicopters over a fifteen-minute period. The Israeli forces used paintballs, plastic bullets and live ammunition, fired by soldiers from the helicopter above and soldiers who had landed on the top deck. The use of live ammunition during this period resulted in fatal injuries to four passengers, and injuries to at least nineteen others, fourteen with gunshot wounds. Escape points to the bridge deck from the top deck were narrow and restricted and as such it was very difficult for passengers in this area to avoid being hit by live rounds. At least one of those killed was using a video camera and not involved in any of the fighting with the soldiers. The majority of gunshot wounds received by passengers were to their upper torsos in the head, thorax, abdomen and back. Given the relatively small number of passengers on the top deck during  the incident, the Mission is driven to the conclusion that the vast majority were in receipt of gunshot wounds.

118. Israeli soldiers continued shooting at passengers who had already been wounded, with live ammunition, soft baton charges (beanbags) and plastic bullets. Forensic analysis demonstrates that two of the passengers killed on the top deck received wounds compatible with being shot at close range while lying on the ground: Furkan Dogan received a bullet in the face and Ibrahim Bilgen received a fatal wound from a soft baton round (beanbag) fired at such close proximity to his head that parts such as wadding penetrated his skull entered his brain.
Furthermore, some of the wounded were subjected to further violence including being hit with the butt of a weapon, being kicked in the head, chest and back and being verbally abused. A number of the wounded passengers were handcuffed and then left unattended for some time before being dragged to the front of the deck by their arms or legs.

119. Once the Israeli forces had secured control of the top deck they undertook measures to move down to the bridge deck below in order to take over the ship’s bridge and thus take control of the ship. In relation to this operation, a series of shooting incidents occurred centred on the portside doorway which gives access to the main stairwell on the bridge deck. This door is near to the hatch and ladder, which allows access from the top deck to the bridge deck.

120. Israeli soldiers fired live ammunition both from the top deck at passengers on the bridge deck below and after they had moved down to the bridge deck. At least four passengers were killed, and at least nine injured (five with firearms injuries) during this phase. None of the four passengers who were killed, including a photographer who at the time of being shot was engaged in taking photographs and was shot by an Israeli soldier positioned on the top deck above, posed any threat to the Israeli forces. There was considerable live fire from Israeli soldiers on the top deck and a number of passengers were injured or killed whilst trying to take refuge inside the door or assisting other to do so. Wounded passengers were brought into the ship through the stairwell and through the ship’s bridge room and were helped downstairs where they could be given some form of medical treatment by doctors and others on board.

170. The circumstances of the killing of at least six of the passengers were in a manner consistent with an extra-legal, arbitrary and summary execution.

172. The Mission is satisfied that much of the force used by the Israeli soldiers on board the Mavi Marmara and from the helicopters was unnecessary, disproportionate, excessive and inappropriate and resulted in the wholly avoidable killing and maiming of a large number of civilian passengers.

Legal Analysis of the treatment of the passengers in Israel
(a) Arbitrary or illegal arrest or detention
215. Article 9, paragraph 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights guards against arbitrary arrest or detention. Since the Israeli interception of the flotilla was unlawful, the detention of the passengers and crew from the seven vessels at Ashdod was also prima facie unlawful since there was no legal basis for the Israeli authorities to have detained and transported these people to Israel. The passengers found themselves in Israel on the basis of an unlawful act by the State of Israel.

Conclusions
264. The conduct of the Israeli military and other personnel towards the flotilla
passengers was not only disproportionate to the occasion but demonstrated levels of
totally unnecessary and incredible violence. It betrayed an unacceptable level of
brutality. Such conduct cannot be justified or condoned on security or any other
grounds. It constituted grave violations of human rights law and international
humanitarian law.

265. The Mission considers that several violations and offences have been committed. It is not satisfied that, in the time available, it can say that it has been able to compile a comprehensive list of all offences. However, there is clear evidence to support prosecutions of the following crimes within the terms of article 147 of the Fourth Geneva Convention:

• wilful killing;
• torture or inhuman treatment;
• wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health.
The Mission also considers that a series of violations of Israel’s obligations under international human rights law have taken place, including:
• right to life (article 6, ICCPR);
• torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (article 7, ICCPR; CAT);
• right to liberty and security of the person and freedom from arbitrary arrest or detention (article 9, ICCPR);
• right of detainees to be treated with humanity and respect for the inherent dignity of the human person (article 10, ICCPR);
• freedom of expression (article 19, ICCPR).

The right to an effective remedy should be guaranteed to all victims. The mission must not be understood to be saying that this is a comprehensive list by any means.

The Turkel Commission that recently lost one of its members (Shabtai Rosen who passed away at the age of 93) will have to study this Report closely and address its concerns one by one.


Fidel Castro on Anti-Semitism

Cuba has never been Israel’s friend. Understandably so. As long as Cuba and the USA maintain tenuous relationships, Cuba will not be a fan of the American’s greatest and most reliable ally. This is why the news from Cuba arrived as a surprise. In a recent interview, Fidel Castro criticized Iranian President Ahmadinejad for what he called his anti-Semitic attitudes. He also questioned his own actions during the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962.


Photo: YNET

Castro repeatedly returned to his excoriation of anti-Semitism, chiding Ahmadinejad for denying the Holocaust. Castro said that Iran could further the cause of peace by "acknowledging the 'unique' history of anti-Semitism and trying to understand why Israelis fear for their existence."

Castro related a story from his childhood that he overheard classmates saying Jews killed Jesus Christ. "I didn't know what a Jew was. I knew of a bird that was a called a 'Jew,' and so for me the Jews were those birds". Castro later added, "This is how ignorant the entire population was."

Castro said, "I don't think anyone has been slandered more than the Jews. I would say much more than the Muslims." Castro also said that the Iranian government should understand that the Jews "were expelled from their land, persecuted and mistreated all over the world, as the ones who killed God."

After undergoing emergency intestinal surgery in July 2006, giving up Cuba's presidency and dropping out of sight for four years, Castro has begun making near-daily public appearances to warn of a nuclear war pitting the US and Israel against Iran and also featuring a Washington-led attack on North Korea.

"This problem is not going to get resolved, because the Iranians are not going to back down in the face of threats," Castro said.

Source: YNET,
http://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506, L-3951540,00.html


Honour Killing

A 10-month investigation by The Independent in Jordan, Pakistan, Egypt, Gaza, the West Bank and other parts of the world reveals unearthed terrifying details of murder of at least 20,000 women a year in the name of 'honour'. Iraqi Kurds, Palestinians in Jordan, Pakistan and Turkey appear to be the worst offenders but honour crimes long ago spread to Britain, Belgium, Russia and Canada and many other nations. Outrageously, rape is also used as a punishment for "honour" crimes. Security authorities and courts across much of the Middle East have connived in reducing or abrogating prison sentences for the family murder of women, often classifying them as suicides to prevent prosecutions.

Near the Belgian city of Charleroi, Sadia Sheikh was shot dead by her brother, Moussafa, because she refused to marry a Pakistani man chosen by her family; in the suburbs of Toronto, Kamikar Kaur Dhillon slashes his Punjabi daughter-in-law, Amandeep, across the throat because she wants to leave her arranged marriage, perhaps for another man.
He told Canadian police that her separation would "disgrace the family name".

In Britain, the phenomenon is well recorded: Surjit Athwal, a Punjabi Sikh woman was murdered on the orders of her London-based mother-in-law for trying to escape a
violent marriage; 15-year-old Tulay Goren, a Turkish Kurd from north London, was
tortured and murdered by her Shia Muslim father because she wished to marry a Sunni
Muslim man; Heshu Yones, 16, was stabbed to death by her father in 2005 for going out with a Christian boy; Caneze Riaz, was burned alive by her husband in Accrington, along with their four children - the youngest 10 years old - because of their "Western ways".

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/the-crimewave-thatshames- the-world-2072201.html


Photo: The Independent

I must demur and protest against the leniency exhibited by legal systems to this abhorrent phenomenon, leniency that essentially legitimizes crime. They show more sensitivity to cultural norms than to human life. It also seems that by adopting this reasoning the legal systems are more anxious to protect their own interests than to secure fundamental moral codes and basic human rights. Alienation of women from the legal systems, mistrust in them that they will protect their right to life is bad for the minorities and it also goes against state interests. The authorities prefer to exhibit a lenient attitude towards inhuman crimes without understanding that by this they undermine law and order.
Apparently the price to be paid is not very substantial: the lives of some dozens of persons, all from minority communities. I find this reasoning offensive and repugnant.

So the state does not mind that homicide takes place in many Muslim communities, and in the Muslim communities no powerful organizations exist to safeguard the most fundamental right: the right to live. Women are left unprotected and a crude rumour might be sufficient to end the life of one suspected of an indecent conduct. Those who do try to protect basic rights often walk on very thin ice, raising their voice against such acts, and at the same time watchful not to rouse angry people against them, who might perceive their activities as 'untraditional', as betraying religion and culture. In some communities, honour is far more important than the life of the girl who shamed her family. The murderers, who are mostly or always male, are not subject to internal punishment or banishment; on the contrary, in their communities they gain in honour. This situation should change, the sooner the better. No country should agree to that, condone it or legitimize it in some form of the shape. Honour killing should be condemned and fought against with all state power. The test of civilization and democracy is always the protection of vulnerable people. In this test until now many countries have miserably failed.


Child Abuse and the Catholic Church

Pope Benedict visited the UK. Both major news channels, BBC and ITV, welcomed him with yet another report about child abuse by clergy. Every few months for the past twenty years the media report such awful incidents. What the church needs is wise and courageous leadership that understands that there is an endemic problem that needs a root solution, otherwise the future is known. Every few months we will hear of yet another child abuse incident. These children are handed like sheep by their parents to God’s servants who abuse the parents’ trust and succumb to their own selfish sexual drives. Those clergymen destroy the children's lives forever.



The much-needed root change is to lift the ban on marriage. Despite all efforts to fight against human weaknesses and sexuality, humans remain human. We need sex. We possess drives. If suppressed, humans will seek refuge wherever possible abusing children deposited in their hands. Is Pope Benedict the person to bring forward the
much needed revolutionary change of allowing clergy the freedom to marry?

In his comments Prof. Sam Lehman-Wilzig wrote: Of course, removing the celibacy requirement could improve the Church's pastoral situation in the long run by opening the doors to the largest potential cohort by far: heterosexual, married men -- who (one would hope and imagine) are far less prone to molest children and others in general. If this occurred, then the Church could be far more selective in who it accepts as priests, thereby winnowing out (at least most of) the pedophiliac and molestation-prone priests. Today, the lack of candidates for the priesthood is so problematic for the Church that it seems to be willing to accept (and turn a blind eye to) just about anyone with pants and a zipper. With a significant expansion of the candidate pool for the priesthood, it would be far less prone to let slide any forms of sexual attack. Instead of three strikes and you're quietly moved to a different parish, a larger heterosexual, married pool of candidates would enable the Vatican to promulgate a policy of "one strike and you're out of the Church".


USA School Education 2010

This story was sent to me by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). It concerns J.W., a first-grader in Sarah T. Reed Elementary School in New Orleans. The 6-year-old boy is just four feet tall and weighs 60 pounds. He enjoys playing basketball, being read to by his parents, colouring and playing outside with friends.

Within one week, J.W. was twice forcibly arrested, handcuffed and shackled to a chair. His “crimes” were talking back to a teacher and later arguing with a classmate over a seat by an armed security officer. The amount of force used on J.W. inflicted severe emotional distress. J.W. has become withdrawn and afraid to go to school. His counselor reports that he has been "deeply affected and traumatised." Shockingly, this level of punishment is official school policy. All across the nation, schools have adopted draconian "zero-tolerance" policies that treat children like criminals and turn schools into prison-like environments.

SPLC filed a lawsuit against the school district to stop the brutal and unconstitutional policy of chaining students who break minor school rules. SPLC is determined to hold the school and school district accountable for what they've done and to stop their barbaric treatment of children so that no one else suffers like J.W.


George Soros’ Donation to Human Rights Watch

Billionaire philanthropist George Soros will give Human Rights Watch $100 million to expand its work throughout the world. The gift is the largest ever by Soros and the largest received by Human Rights Watch.



Soros, 80, said the gift is the first of a series of large gifts that he plans to make. This year, Soros has donated some $700 million to several causes. He earned $3.3 billion from his hedge fund in 2009.

Human Rights Watch, which monitors human rights abuses worldwide, said it will add about 120 staff members to its current 300 posted in capitals around the world, open new offices and expand the translation of its approximately 100 reports a year. Based in New York, the organisation was founded in 1978. It is funded solely by private donations.

I commend Soros for his generosity. I wish he would donate some funds to promote specific human rights causes in Israel and Palestine. There are quite a few worthy organizations that could certainly use some assistance. My special interest is in the Center for Democratic Studies, which I founded in 2003.

Source: http://www.jta.org/news/article/2010/09/07/2740840/soros-gives-100- million-to-human-rights-watch


New Books

Christopher C. Harmon, Terrorism Today (London: Routledge, 2009).



The third edition of this best-selling insight into terrorism today has been updated and revised to include what the author terms the new ‘militant Moslem international.’
Drawing directly on the words and ideas of terrorists themselves, this book is an examination of patterns, current trends and future threats in terrorism worldwide.
It explores the ideology and psychology, the politics and policies, the strategies and operations of many active small groups and major insurgencies. The book reflects on modern technology and tactics, and also on counter-terrorism mechanisms.

Terrorism is a worldwide phenomenon that troubles many nations. It is the deliberate and systematic murder, maiming, and menacing of the innocent to inspire fear for political ends. Terrorism is used by single-minded small groups, state agents, and broader insurgent movements to seek political and military ends. The terrorist leader emerges as a calculating, innovative and often well-educated person whose use of violence against the innocent is calibrated for maximum effects.

This is an important resource for students of terrorism, counter-insurgency and international security. Its main weakness is lack of careful discussion of the human rights violations that are increasingly the result of the War on Terror. The author is concerned with the terrorist phenomenon and with the ways to fight against it, not with the legality and the legitimacy of the means used to tackle and eradicate terror.

I thank Routledge for a copy of this book.


Yvonne Jewkes and Majid Yar (eds.), Handbook of Internet Crime (Portland, OR:
Willan, 2010).

This is a very thorough collection (654 pages) of essays on many aspects of Internet crime in the fields of New Media, sociology, criminology, film studies, computer law, forensics, and culture studies. It is arguably the most comprehensive book on cybercrime to date. It deals with Internet-related crime, deviance, policing, law and regulation in the 21st century. The Handbook reflects the range and depth of cybercrime research and scholarship, reflecting on the global nature of cybercrime problems, and the international span of scholarship addressing its challenges.



I particularly enjoyed James Curran, “Reinterpreting Internet history”, Barry Sandywell, “On the globalization of crime”, Steven Furnell, “Hackers, viruses and malicious software”, Dorothy Denning, “Terror’s web”, Ethel Quayle, “Child pornography”, and Maggie Wykes, “Harm, suicide and homicide in cyberspace”. The subject matters are diverse and cover a wide range of issues. I also enjoyed the international nature of the book whose contributors come from different nations, with different approaches to cybercrime. The American approach is very different than the rest of the world, and this is well reflected in this rich resource.

http://www.willanpublishing.co.uk/cgi-bin/indexer?product=9781843925248

I thank Majid Yar for a copy of this book.


A Reporter’s Profile
In Memory of Mark Bianu (Haifa, 2010) (Hebrew)

Seven years have passed since the Maxim suicide murder that resulted with the death of many people. This murder literally wiped out families who came to have a peaceful meal in an Israeli-Palestinian restaurant. Among the dead were my student Mark Bianu and his newlywed wife Naomi.

Mark's family works hard to commemorate the life and work of this exceptional man whose life were abruptly cut short by this act of despicable terrorism. This new book includes five sections. In the first section titled “The Reporter” there are short articles of people who knew Mark from his work as a reporter in the Haifa local TV news. Among the authors are the Director of the Israel Broadcast Association, Amir Gilat; Mayor of Haifa Yonah Yahav, Commander of Haifa Police Nir Mariash and local reporters.


Mark is holding the microphone

The second section, “The Academician”, includes articles by Mark’s teachers and fellow students. Among the authors are Professor Oz Almog, Professor Sheizaf Rafaeli, Professor Gabi Weimann, Dr. Yariv Tzfati, Dr. Lilach Nir, Dr. Jonathan Cohen, Dr. Aimy Lev, Dr. Rivki Ribak and yours truly.

The third section was authored by Mark’s friends, reflecting on his big heart and similar captivating smile, while the fourth and fifth sections bring the voices of Mark’s teachers at school and Mark’s family. The last section includes some of the articles that this young man wrote before his life at the age of 30 were taken in the most tragic way, including an article that Mark and I wrote together about Israeli wars as covered by Haaretz newspaper. This work was based on Mark’s seminar paper which I thought was excellent and in some institutions would be considered as a worthy MA thesis.

I thank Florence Bianu for a copy of this touching book.


New Article

“Ethical Space: Journal with a Difference”, The Review of Communication, Issue 10:3 (2010), pp. 228-235.
Authors: Richard Keeble - Richard Keeble (PhD., City University, London, 1996) is Professor of Journalism, University of Lincoln, School of Journalism, Main Campus, Brayford Pool, Lincoln LN6 7TS, UK; Raphael Cohen-Almagor - Raphael Cohen-Almagor (D.Phil, Oxford University, 1991) is Professor of Politics, University of Hull, Cottingham Road, Hull, HU6 7RX, UK



Abstract
Ethical Space is a journal with a difference—based on the premise that many segments of the modern media are neglecting ethical concerns. In a reality of fierce competition, ratings, and economic considerations, ethics becomes a secondary, sometimes irritating issue. The idea, so to speak, is “Let me do my job of reporting and don't trouble me with your morals.” As the media have grown in size, scope, and means of dissemination, so the academic interest in the media has grown. More and more departments of media, journalism, and communication have been established in North America, in Europe, as well as in other parts of the world. More courses on media ethics are being offered to evoke awareness to ethical media concerns that will accompany students in their future work in the field. And more pertinent journals have been established to entertain ethical concerns. But it is an unfair race. Often, economic and financial considerations triumph over ethical considerations. Many academic programs do not hire media ethicists and, if they teach media ethics, the courses are taught by scholars who are not specialists.
Often, media ethics courses are not obligatory for all students. Thus they miss the only opportunity they may have to acquire awareness and knowledge of ethical concerns.
The commitment of the academic journal, Ethical Space, is to examine significant historical and emerging ethical issues in communication.

Keywords: Ethical Space; journalism ethics; PR ethics; communication academics and professionals


Israeli Summer

Israel’s relative quiet does good for the tourism industry. Tel Aviv hotels are in full capacity. As in previous summers, French is frequently heard on the beach and in bars and restaurants. This year, in addition to French I heard lots of English, Italian, Spanish and German. Tourists are coming from all over the world to enjoy the gems Israel is blessed with. The Tel Aviv promenade is stunning as ever, the sand golden, the food excellent, the people are welcoming, and the weather is hot and steamy, as usual is the case in August.




LIFE in Israel in 1948

LIFE Magazine archive has a vast collection of photos. See
http://benatlas.com/2009/07/life-in-israel-in-1948-part-1/ ;
http://benatlas.com/2009/07/life-in-israel-in-1948-part-2/ and
http://benatlas.com/2009/08/life-in-israel-in-1948-part-3/ for photos of Israel in
1948.


Gem of the Month – The Moody Blues

In my youth, one of my favourite groups was The Moody Blues. I love the tunes, and the voice of the lead singer. Three of the original members remain, and they added four other talented musicians. Presently they are touring the UK and Amsterdam, and I was fortunate to see and hear these giants in London. Amazingly, Justin Hayward’s voice remains as it was some forty years ago.

Their greatest album is:



Here is one of the greatest ever:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rkgm1yGgbM

See also http://www.brumbeat.net/moody.htm


Movie

Departures (2008)

In Judaism, we wrap the dead in robes, conduct a funeral procession leading to the graveyard, where people say prayers and bid farewell to the deceased. Then, we bury the dead. It is a very simple ceremony. In Japan they do it differently.

I have spent the past twenty years studying death with dignity. I did not pay much attention to the issue of dignity after death. “Departures” hammers this theme and forces you to think and rethink.



Daigo (Masahiro Motoki) is a cellist whose orchestra had been dissolved. He is looking for work and the first ad he encounters is entitled Departures. Daigo believes this ad was placed by a travel agency. The available position, however, turns out to be with a company that meticulously prepares corpses for cremation. Daigo has to overcome his prejudices regarding the job, something he is able to do upon watching his mentor’s dignified conduct; but then he has to face others, including his loyal, optimistic and fullof-life wife (Ryoko Hirosue), who does not wish him to deal with corpses.



This slow and beautiful drama, which won the Oscar, is about four people and one ghost that continues to hunt Daigo throughout his life, accompanied by beautiful music (if you like cello, this one is for you). The film is sensitively directed by Yojiro Takita (http://www.lovefilm.com/browse/contributor/97623/Yojiro_Takita.html). You cannot remain indifferent watching Daigo-Motoki’s agony until he comes to peace with his ghost; the superb acting of Hirosue and Diago’s mentor, Tsutomu Yamazaki, and the beautiful scenes of preparing people to their final departure. The final scene is breathtaking.


Monthly Poem

Summer Sun

Great is the sun, and wide he goes
Through empty heaven with repose;
And in the blue and glowing days
More thick than rain he showers his rays.

Though closer still the blinds we pull
To keep the shady parlour cool,
Yet he will find a chink or two
To slip his golden fingers through.

The dusty attic spider-clad
He, through the keyhole, maketh glad;
And through the broken edge of tiles
Into the laddered hay-loft smiles.

Meantime his golden face around
He bares to all the garden ground,
And sheds a warm and glittering look
Among the ivy's inmost nook.

Above the hills, along the blue,
Round the bright air with footing true,
To please the child, to paint the rose,
The gardener of the World, he goes.

Robert Louis Stevenson

More poems from Robert Louis Stevenson
(http://www.poemhunter.com/robert-louis-stevenson/)


Light Side

Don Juan, Valentino, Casanova and Jacob are having lunch in a restaurant in Bern. They speak about women, what else.

Don Juan: Last week I woke up with a blond lady in Rome, made love for lunch with a
red-head lady in Venice, and finished the day with a lovely brunette in Florence.

Valentino: I stayed in hotel in Seville, met five women in three days and made love to all of them.

Casanova: I met three married ladies in a bar in Paris, left with all three to one of the ladies’ rooms. When her husband was about to arrive we moved to a second room, and then to the third room. There I was almost caught by the angry husband. As a matter of fact, this is why I am here today.

All this time, Jacob is sitting quietly eating his pesto pasta.

Don Juan: What about you, Jacob?
Jacob: I sleep only with my wife – sometimes, he added dryly.

Casanova: And don’t you find it a bit, how shall we say, boring?

Jacob: I do. But if I sleep with another woman I will spend my life moving from one bed to another, running for my life.

Peace and love.

Yours as ever,

Rafi


My last communications are available on http://almagor.blogspot.com/
Earlier posts at my home page: http://hcc.haifa.ac.il/~rca/

People wishing to subscribe to this Monthly Newsletter are welcome to e-mail me at
r.cohen-almagor@hull.ac.uk