Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Palestinian MP kidnapped from the Red Cross in Jerusalem

Palestine Information Center – 26/09/2011

OCCUPIED JERUSALEM — An Israeli Border Guard unit, dressed as Arabs, kidnapped Palestinian MP Muhammad Attoun at the entrance of the Jerusalem Red Cross at noon Monday in a move expected to spark rage among local Palestinians.

The operation was also coordinated with the Israeli occupation police unit’s minorities division, according to media reports.

MP Attoun, along with another Palestinian MP Ahmed Totah and the Palestinian Authority’s former minister of Jerusalem Khalid Abu Arafeh, were staying at a protest tent at the Red Cross compound in the Sheikh Jarrah district after the Israeli occupation authorities revoked their right of residence in their native city of Jerusalem and sought to banish them.

Attoun’s wife said she was visiting him alongside her daughter when undercover officers suddenly pounced on him as he neared the entrance of the Red Cross premises where he has been holding a sit-in for over a year to protest the banishment decision. She added that she does not know where her husband was taken to.

Director of the Jerusalem information center Muhammad Sadiq told our correspondent that when Attoun’s wife and daughter came to visit, three masked men abducted Attoun and detained him in a vehicle before Israeli security forces arrived at the scene.

Sadiq said the entry into the Red Cross sanctuary was in violation of international laws, adding that the arrest of the Palestinian people’s government representative could trigger friction across the occupied Palestinian territories.

Attoun, Totah, and Abu Arafeh, politicians from Hamas’s Change and reform bloc, were arrested in 2006 after Hamas gained dominance in the Palestinian ballot boxes. The Israeli occupation authorities also revoked their residence in Jerusalem after the men were released following three year prison terms.

September 26, 2011 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance, Subjugation - Torture | Leave a comment

Egyptian Forces Flood Tunnel With Wastewater, One Injured, Two Missing

By Saed Bannoura | IMEMC & Agencies | September 25, 2011

Egyptian security forces used wastewater to flood a siege-busting tunnel along the border with Gaza on Sunday. Two Palestinians went missing and one was injured.

Medical sources reported that the wounded person was moved to a local hospital. Rescue teams are trying to locate the two missing persons.

On Saturday, two Palestinian youths were killed due to a gas leak explosion at a tunnel in Rafah, in the southern part of the Gaza Strip.

Medical sources reported that medics and rescue teams managed to locate seven persons who went missing in the tunnel; three of them were wounded while two of the three died of their wounds later on.

September 25, 2011 Posted by | Subjugation - Torture | 2 Comments

The real cost of Al Rumeida roadblock

25 September 2011 | International Solidarity Movement, West Bank

For the last three days Ahmed Sau and Khalil have been loading bushell loads of white building material on carts pulled by a horse and a donkey as they trek up the steep hill going to Jabel Al Rahmeh. At the other end is a truck filled almost to the top. Several men await Ahmed and unload the wooden cart and the trek begins anew.

As the horses struggle up the last part of the hill, Ahmed and some children help to push the heavy load to its destination. It is in these ways that the Israeli occupation affects the common people. Slowly, it attempts to strangle the economy. A simple truck ride down the hill is turned into a laborious undertaking by several men, children and beasts of burden.

“It has been this way for at least 10 years,” commented an observer.

When asked why they were doing it this way, Ahmed who spoke no English, motioned to the yellow steel metal preventing the truck to go through. Hurrying as evening was fast approaching, he got back on the cart and rode down the hill again.

September 25, 2011 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Subjugation - Torture | Leave a comment

Settlers uproot 400 olive trees near Nablus

Ma’an – 25/09/2011

NABLUS — Dozens of Israeli settlers on Sunday uprooted over 400 Palestinian-owned olive trees near Nablus in the northern West Bank, a Palestinian Authority official said.

Settlement Affairs official Ghassan Doughlas said settlers attacked fields between Qusra and Duma villages south of Nablus.

On Friday, Israeli forces killed a Palestinian man, Issam Kamal Odeh, 33, during clashes sparked by settlers who entered Qusra.

The incident comes amid a surge in settler violence in the northern district, including village raids, attacks on Palestinians and their property and the vandalism of two mosques in recent weeks.

In Qusra on Sept. 5, settlers torched a mosque and spray-painted anti-Arab slogans and the Star of David.

September 25, 2011 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation, Subjugation - Torture | Leave a comment

Daughter of Mayor: I was interrogated 13 times while handcuffed

Palestine In formation Center – 25/09/2011

RAMALLAH — The daughter of Al-Bireh mayor Jamal al-Tawil said she was bound, photographed, isolated and questioned by some 13 investigators after Israeli forces arrested her on 6 July without charges in an apparent bid to pressure her father.

Bushra al-Tawil was transferred between three detention centers in Beit El and Ashkelon and kept in isolation for sixteen days before ending up in HaSharon prison, where she is currently being held, said Botheina Daqmaq, head of the Palestinian Mandela rights organization, who at length managed to visit Tawil and collect statements.

Daqmaq learned that Tawil was denied freedom by an Israeli court although no formal charges have been placed against her.

“Thirteen investigators took turns to interrogate me while I was handcuffed to the back. They insulted me using profane language and screamed at me loudly asking that I repent,” Tawil said, adding that the investigators threatened to harm her family members and bring her parents in for the interrogation. They also photographed her while she was bound in cuffs, she said.

“In a terrible atmosphere of isolation and deprivation of all my rights, they led me one day to a private room and placed me on a lie detector for three hours, and did not allow me to pray and I was barely allowed to use the bathroom,” she said.

Tawil informed the rights activist and lawyer that she was placed in isolation for 15 days upon her arrival to the Israeli HaSharon prison, noting that the most difficult part of all was what she called the “journey of misery”, when she was repeatedly removed for court hearings.

“The prison administration sent me to court three times consecutively without a court hearing taking place,” she said, noting that each time she was transported by a large armored vehicle without air or light, where the prisoner sits shackled by the hands and feet on an iron bench.

In her first visit by a rights organization after she was denied a visit by the Red Cross, Bushra made desperate calls for looking into her case, saying that the courts ruled for release, but Israeli intelligence foiled the decision.

September 25, 2011 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Illegal Occupation, Subjugation - Torture | Leave a comment

BRICS Emphasize United Stance against Sanctions on Syria

Al-Manar | September 25, 2011

The BRICS group that consists of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa assured that it will express a united stance in the United Nations regarding the Syrian situation, and warned against increasing sanctions on Syria.

In a meeting the Foreign ministers of the BRICS group held on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly meeting, they assured their united stance against increasing sanctions on Syria, considering that this would intensify and complicate the crisis, and would threaten peace and stability in the region.

In the same context, Russia stated its rejection to support the US in demanding the Syrian president to step down.

The Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov clarified that the US demand comes in the framework of encouraging internal conflict in Syria, and warned that armed groups were taking advantage of the protests.

For its part, the Russian Senate Delegation that recently completed its visit to Syria said that the crisis in Syria is a result of internal and external elements.

“Some TV stations broadcasted protests in Syria as well as military actions that are very much far from reality… I say this as I was there. We have made sure that some TV channels are intentionally falsifying the events,” Deputy Chairman of the Russian Federal Council, Ilyas Umakhanov said.

On the other hand, the Foreign Ministers of the member countries in the Islamic Cooperation Organization considered that the US administration’s attempt to impose sanctions against Syria is an outrageous violation to the standards of the international law, and expressed their appreciation to the Syrian leadership’s call for dialogue.

September 25, 2011 Posted by | Deception, Economics, Solidarity and Activism | Leave a comment

Israeli Rejectionism

Book Review by Ludwig Watzal | Palestine Chronicle | September 24, 2011

(Zalman Amit/Daphna Levit, Israeli Rejectionism. A Hidden Agenda in the Middle East Peace Process, Pluto, London-New York, pp 208.)

After having negotiated for 20 years with different Israeli governments about a solution to the conflict in the Middle East, the Palestinian leadership is sick and tired of the charade that the U.S., the rest of the West and even the occupied Palestinians under the rule of Mahmud Abbas call “peace process”. Abbas asks the United Nations to grant the “State of Palestine” full membership status. The Israeli government fiercely opposes this move and so does the U.S. Since 1967, when Israel´s violations of international norms were brought before the UN Security Council time and again, the U.S. government has backed it off-hand. For the large majority of U.S. governments, Israel was always the “good guy” even after it attacked the USS liberty in the June war of 1967 in international waters off the shore of Israel and killed 34 US marines. At the question, who is responsible for the stalemate in the progress towards peace in the Middle East for the last 80 years, the book “Israeli Rejectionism” comes into play.

Already in the introduction of this book, the authors blame Israeli leadership for its rejectionist attitude towards peace. “Our position is that Israel was never primarily interested in establishing peace with its neighbors unless such a peace was totally on its own terms.” (11) According to the authors, Israel has repeatedly proclaimed its commitment to peace, but it´s real political strategy has been to thwart any real possibility of peace. It´s leadership has always been convinced “that peace is not in Israel`s interest”. As history shows, this holds true up till now. This peace-rejecting attitude neither evolved with the occupation of the rest of Palestine in 1967 nor with the establishment of the state in 1948 but can be traced back to the first Zionist leaders such as Theodor Herzl and especially David Ben-Gurion as the authors write. As [the] authors state: [it is] not Israel which lacks a viable “partner for peace”, as the Israeli propaganda tells the public, but it is the other way around: the Palestinians have no reliable “partner for peace”. To prove this fallacy, they run through a gamut of statements, starting from the slogan “Palestine – homeland for the Jews?” via “Barak leaves no stone unturned” to “Peace on a downhill slope”. On this journey, they find the peace-resistant party: the different governments of Israel.

This assertion by the authors runs counter to the propaganda promoted by Israeli hasbara and their friends in the U.S. and elsewhere. Both authors were initially true believers of the socialist Zionist cause serving the neophyte state within the kibbutz movement. Over many years, they were loyal followers of Zionist ideology. Zalman Amit particularly was a determined Zionist, who was even an emissary of the United Kibbutz Movement in Canada. There, he delivered sermons about the virtues of Zionism. At one of the Jewish jamborees, which he organized, he gave a speech in which he elaborated on the standard left-wing Zionist beliefs. After he finished, an Israeli friend who attend the gatherings for several days, asked him: “Do you really believe this?” So he explained to him that Ben-Gurion “never wanted peace”. The Zionist façade slowly cracked. Both authors engaged in the June war of 1967. After the Six Day War, they finally experienced their aha-experience regarding the reality of Zionism. At that time, they were already adults. At that junction, they realized how difficult it was to admit to themselves that they had entertained a pipe dream. Finally, they realized that Israel always was the side that sabotaged opportunities for peace with the Arabs. Moshe Dayan’s famous “telephone strategy” was an excuse for him to “do nothing”. Israel waited for a telephone call from the Arabs but the call never came!

Among many historians and politicians, David Ben-Gurion, Israel’s first Prime Minister, is highly regarded. But by the picture the authors draw of his policy, he seems as a mere rejectionist; he did everything to sabotage any compromise towards the Arab side. His policy, according to the authors, was to gain as much territory with a minimum of Arab inhabitants. As his writings show, transfer and expulsion were political options. When Israel together with France and Britain conquered the Sinai in 1956, he talked about the “Kingdom of Israel” encompassed biblical boundaries, but he also avoided any concrete commitment where Israel´s normal boarders should run. One day, before the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel was made, the question of borders arose in a meeting of Zionist politicians. Ben-Gurion, according to the protocol, said this should be left to “developments”, a euphemism for further conquest. Up to this day, the Israeli leadership won’t tell where Israel’s exact borders should run. The authors show that former Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser started several peace initiatives but to no avail. The Zionist leadership was not interested in them and depicted him “as an enemy of the State of Israel”. Ben-Gurion also plotted against his successor Moshe Sharett. He was also a driving force in the 1956 conspiracy against Egypt with the colonial powers of France and Britain to overthrow Nasser in the war of 1956. Although this assault was militarily successful, it turned out to be a Pyrrhic victory, especially for Ben-Gurion. In the UN Security Council, the US tried to condemn Israel as the aggressor. For the first time, Britain and France cast their veto against the US. Massive pressure from the Eisenhower administration led to the withdrawal of all occupying forces from Egyptian territory. Ben-Gurion’s “Third Kingdom of Israel” was short-lived, it just lasted for four days.

Between the Israeli attacks in 1956 and 1967 there have been a number of military encroachments and Israeli provocations against its Arab neighbors, such as on the Golan and against Gaza. After the June war of 1967 Ben-Gurion’s dream came true. Israel had captured land for which it claimed “biblical entitlement“. According to the authors, all of Israel’s leadership were “intoxicated“ by this achievement of “messianic dimensions“. In this mode of “drunken euphoria“ even self-proclaimed doves like Abba Eban referred to the armistice boundaries as the “Auschwitz lines“, and the nationalist Menachem Begin called for outright annexation of the  West Bank and Gaza. The authors show that the Israeli government started right away with its colonial project by evacuating and destroying the Mugraby neighborhood adjacent to the Wailing Wall. Yigal Alon drafted at that time his famous “Allon Plan“, which still serves as a blueprint for Israel’s expansionist policies.

According to the authors – Zalman Amit and Daphna Levit – there are no major differences between Labor-, Kadima-, or Likud-led governments regarding colonization of the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT). It is only a matter of rhetoric that divides the three political camps. Between the June war of 1967 and the Yom Kippur war in 1973 there have been several peace initiatives by President Nasser or his successor Anwar al-Sadat but Israel was only willing to make “peace“ according to its own terms. The “expansionist positions“ among Israel´s ruling political class continued as revealed by the “Galilee document” drafted by Prime Minister Golda Meir confident, Israel Galilee. “It was no conciliatory step towards peace, and reinforced the Egyptian and Syrian inclination to go to war.” (84)

Although the State of Israel had the upper hand, the sudden Yom Kippur war that dented the feeling of invincibility left Israel with a collective post-war trauma. Some Israeli politicians realized that the Middle East conflict cannot be solved by military means but only through a peace agreement. The reason why the peace process went nowhere lies, according to the authors, in the country’s unwillingness to give up the occupied territories and to recognize the national aspiration of the Palestinian people. The Israeli intransigence continued under the government of Menachem Begin, although he made peace with Egypt. After the fiasco in Lebanon, he was replaced by Yitzhak Shamir in 1983. Shamir “considered the only acceptable position for Israel was no retreat at all, and peace was not particularly high on his agenda“. (104) When Shamir was defeated by Yitzhak Rabin in the 1992 election, he made clear that “his intention was to drag out the negotiations for at least ten years“. (110) The peace conference in Madrid in 1991 agreed that all parties to the conflict should negotiate under Washington´s umbrella.

Space prevents from commenting on each particular historic incident the authors describe. One period is, however, worth mentioning. It’s Prime Minister Ehud Barak’s short term in office. He is one of the most rejeconist Israeli politicians, although he disguised himself, until 2011, in Labor clothes that are still considered “left-wing” by a few political pundits. He comes from a Zionist Kibbutz Movement, as Rabin´s Minister for the Interior he voted against the Oslo accords, and as Israel’s Prime Minister he destroyed not only the remnants of the so-called peace process but also the so-called Israeli Zionist left. His role at Camp David in the year 2000 was solely destructive. He played games not only with the Americans but also with Arafat and the Israeli public. He and Clinton blamed Yassir Arafat for the failure at Camp David. Actually, he was the one who deceived everybody in order to disguise his rejectionist attitude. The authors demonstrate this by quoting people who attended this meeting that could have led to peace if the U. S. would have played its role as an “honest broker” seriously.

After Ariel Sharon defeated Barak, in 2001, peace did not have a chance at all. The events of 9/11 gave Sharon a welcome pretext for dismantling Arafat’s administration in the autonomous areas and commit atrocities in the OPT. The authors’ description of the Olmert government gives no hope for the future, not to speak of the right-wing Netanyahu/Lieberman government. They come to the conclusion that a peace agreement was never concluded because it “was never Israel´s top priority”. (163). Israel´s military strength is one of its main trumps, “but Israel has practically evolved into an army that has a country”. (163)  For the authors, Israel’s ruling class is so successful because the Israeli people want to see themselves as “protected and mighty”, and the settlement movement has been so successful because it presents itself as purely Jewish, authentic, and as a grass-roots force. Amit/Levit name many distortions: Israel is a substantial nuclear power with a powerful military; the Israeli Jewish people live in a “self-imposed ghetto” and nourish their own sense of victimhood, and claim they are constantly threatened from without. The authors see no prospect for peace in their lifetime.

The book’s special value is in demonstrating that the Arabs are not the ones who ‘never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity’, as Abba Eban used to say. The real rejectionists are Israel’s elites who seek further territory for their “Eretz Israel” at the cost of another people. That “Israel is no partner for peace” is a daring, but well argued, conclusion that should be thoroughly examined by all those who are involved in Middle Eastern affairs.

– Dr. Ludwig Watzal lives as a journalist in Bonn, Germany.

September 24, 2011 Posted by | Book Review, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , | 2 Comments

Newspaper Editor Files Suit Against Philadelphia Police for Constitutional Violations

By Walter Brasch | OpEd News | September 21, 2011

A former managing editor for an online newspaper, OpEdNews, has sued the city of Philadelphia and eight of its police officers for violating her Constitutional rights.

Cheryl Biren-Wright, Pennsauken, N.J., charges the defendants with violating her 1st, 4th, and 14th amendment rights. The civil action, filed in the U.S. District Court, Philadelphia, is based upon her arrest during a peaceful protest September 12, 2009, at the Army Experience Center (AEC) in the Franklin Mills Mall.

According to the complaint, Biren-Wright, who was not a part of the demonstration but at the mall as a reporter-photographer, was arrested and charged with failure to disperse and conspiracy, second degree misdemeanors. The charges were subsequently dropped by the Philadelphia district attorney.

The Philadelphia police also arrested and charged six protestors with conspiracy and failure to disperse—Elaine Brower, 55, New York, N.Y.; Richie Marini, 35, Staten Island, N.Y.; Joan Pleune, 70, Brooklyn, N.Y.(one of the original Freedom Riders in 1961); Beverly Rice, 72, New York, N.Y.; Debra Sweet, 57, Brooklyn, N.Y.; and Sarah Wellington, 26, Piermont, N.Y. Two months after Biren-Wright’s case was dropped, the six protestors were found not guilty in Philadelphia Municipal Court.

Paul J. Hetznecker, who represented the six defendants in the criminal trial, and Biren-Wright in her civil suit, believes that police over-reaction to protestors, as well as their lack of knowledge or appreciation for Constitutional protections, may be “a systemic problem throughout the country.” Hetznecker says under Constitutional and state law, “There can not be an arbitrary and capricious decision to end the civil rights of the protestors.”

The civil suit complaint charges that police violated Biren-Wright’s First Amendment rights to “gather information . . . to cover a matter of public interest including the law enforcement activity in public places.” Actions by the police deprived her of 4th and 14th amendment rights that, according to the complaint, protect against “unreasonable search and seizure,” “loss of physical liberty,” and “freedom from excessive use of unreasonable and justified force.”

The suit lists six separate counts:

● Abridgement of her rights under the First Amendment to observe and record news in a public place;

● False arrest and imprisonment;

● Use of excessive force by the police;

● False arrest under state law;

● Common Law Assault under state law; and,

● Failure of the City of Philadelphia to adequately train and supervise its police.

The complaint charges that because of accepted practices, the defendants may have believed “that their actions would not be properly investigated by supervisory officers and that the misconduct would not be investigated or sanctioned, but would be tolerated.” The policy, according to the complaint, “demonstrates a deliberate indifference on the part of the policymakers of the City of Philadelphia to the constitutional rights of persons within the City, and were the cause of the violations of the Plaintiff’s rights. . . .”

Named in the suit in addition to the City of Philadelphia are Lt. Dennis Konczyk, officers Tyrone Wiggins, John Logan, Robert Anderson, Donald West, William Stuski, and two unnamed John Does.

The Philadelphia Police Department refused to comment about the suit as a matter of policy regarding “issues in court,” according to Jillian Russell, Department spokesperson.

In August 2008, the Army opened the AEC, a 14,500 square foot “virtual educational facility” with dozens of video games. The Center, deliberately located near an indoor skateboard park, replaced five more traditional recruiting offices, and was designated as a two-year pilot program. The initial cost was $12 million.

Army recruiters could not actively recruit children under 17, but could talk with the teens and answer any of their questions about the Army. Among the virtual games was one in which children as young as 13 could ride a stationary Humvee and shoot a simulated M-16 rifle at life-like video images of Muslims and terrorists.

Because of the emphasis upon war, and a requirement that all persons had to sign in at the center, thus allowing the recruiters to follow up as much as four or five years later, peace activists began speaking out against the AEC.

To counter what was quickly becoming a public relations problem, the Army sent out news releases, picked up by the mainstream media, and established a full social media campaign to explain the “benefits” of the AEC. The protests continued.

Elaine Brower, whose son was in Iraq on his third tour of duty, told OpEdNews a day after her arrest: “The AEC is giving guns to 13-year-olds, drawing them in with violent video games. As more and more Afghan civilians and U.S. military are being killed in the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan, we’re saying ‘no’ to these wars. We’ve got to stop the flow of youth into the military, where they’re being used to commit war crimes in our name.”

With a police permit, and escorted by officers from Philadelphia’s Civil Affairs Unit, about 200–250 protestors—most of them middle-aged or senior citizens, many of them veterans—had come to the AEC, believing their First Amendment rights were being protected. The protest, although noisy at times, was peaceful; the counter-demonstration wasn’t.

According to the complaint, “The counter-demonstrators [members of an organization known as The Gathering of Eagles] yelled, jeered and taunted the AEC protestors. At no time did [the police] direct, or attempt to limit the First Amendment activities of the counter-demonstrators,” nor were they ever told to disperse.

Throughout the demonstration, the protestors had not given any indication that they posed any physical threat to others. However, about 45 minutes after the demonstration began, the police, under direction of Lt. Konczyk, ordered the protestors to disperse.

At that point, Biren-Wright, according to the complaint, “placed herself outside the immediate area . . . so as not to interfere with the police activity.” She continued to photograph and report on the demonstration. The complaint charges that Lt. Konczyk, “without just cause or legal justification,” directed several officers to arrest her, walking past several protestors and counter-demonstrators. She says she told the officers she was a member of the press. At no time, she says, did she participate as a demonstrator nor verbally or physically threaten anyone. The officers, says Biren-Wright, arrested her without any warning. The arresting officer’s “degree of anger—he was clearly red-faced—was inappropriate,” she recalls. The police, says Biren-Wright, “were clearly targeting me, trying to keep me from recording the demonstration and their reactions.”

One officer, says Biren-Wright, “unnecessarily twisted my arm.” Another officer seized her camera and personal items. One of the officers put plastic cuffs on her wrists “so tight that it caused significant pain, swelling and bruising, and an injury that lasted for several weeks,” according to the complaint.

Biren-Wright’s 15-year-old daughter was shopping in the mall during the protest, but had reunited with her mother shortly before the arrests. Her daughter, says Biren-Wright, “came closer upon the arrest and I told the officer she was my daughter and a minor and would be alone.” The officer, says Biren-Wright, snapped, “You should have thought of that before.” At the processing center that police had previously set up at the mall, Biren-Wright told several officers that her daughter was alone in the mall and was from out of state. “None of them did anything to ensure her safety,” she says. The daughter, unsupervised, eventually found Rob Kall, OpEdNews editor, who drove her to the jail to take her mother’s keys and then drove her home, where she spent the night alone.

Outside the mall, counter-protestors shouted obscenities as those arrested boarded the police bus. “They were standing at the door to the bus,” says Biren-Wright, “and posed a safety issue to us since we were in handcuffs.”

The six who were arrested and Biren-Wright were initially taken to the 15th District jail. Richie Marini, the lone male arrested, was kept at the district jail. The six women were transferred to the jail at the Philadelphia Police headquarters, known by locals as the “Roundhouse,” where a nurse took each woman’s vital signs and asked if there were any injuries. “I showed him my wrist and thumb that were already red and swollen” from the restrictive handcuffs, says Biren-Wright. His response, she says, was “That doesn’t count.”

Biren-Wright, along with the other five women, was held for 14 hours. At 5 a.m., she says, they were released from the “Roundhouse” onto a dark and barren street—there were no taxis anywhere near—and locked out of the police station. Although the women had cell phones, they had not been allowed to call for rides while in the jail area. Outside, they called friends, but waited until help arrived. Marini was released from the district jail later that morning.

The only reason Biren-Wright’s pictures of the demonstration survived is because she had secretly removed the memory chip during her arrest. When the camera was finally returned, “all of the settings were messed up and the lens was not replaced properly.”

The Army closed the AEC at the end of the pilot program. It had claimed that because of increased enlistments nationwide, the Center was no longer needed. It never acknowledged that the protestors and the public reaction may have been a reason for the closing.

In an unrelated case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled in October 2010 [Kelly v. Borough of Carlisle] that recording police activity in public places is protected by Constitutional guarantees. This month, the ACLU settled a case, for $48,500, in Pittsburgh when a University of Pittsburgh police officer arrested Elijah Matheny and charged him with felony violation of the state’s Wiretap Act for using a cell phone to record police activity. Matheny spent a night in jail following his arrest. [See: Matheny v. County of Allegheny, et al.] The ACLU charged that the district attorney’s office “had engaged in a pattern of erroneously advising law enforcement that audio taping police officers in public violates Pennsylvania’s Wiretap Act.” Following the Third Circuit’s decision in the Kelly case, a conviction against Matheny is expected to be overturned.

The arrests in Philadelphia, Carlisle, and Pittsburgh underscore two major problems, both prevalent throughout the country. The first problem is a lack of understanding and respect for the Constitution by a large number, although not a majority, of police officers. For that reason, all police forces and district attorneys offices, from small isolated rural communities to the largest urban departments, need to have constant education about civil rights and Constitutional guarantees—and the penalties for violating those rights.

The second major problem is inherent within the mass media. Reporters need to know how and when to challenge authority to protect their own and the public’s rights.  A camera crew from the PBS “Frontline” series was at the protest, but abruptly stopped recording the demonstration after Brower was arrested and either before or during Biren-Wright’s arrest. Rob Kall later said that a member of the “Frontline” crew told him the police informed them they would be arrested if they continued to film the demonstration.

Police threats, which violate Constitutional guarantees, place a “chilling effect” upon the media to observe and record actions by public officials. Even without a direct order by a public official, reporters may do what they perceive to be what others want them to do. The media, like police and public officials, also need constant education to know when police orders are lawful and when they are not. An order to move away from a scene may be lawful. An order to stop filming a scene upon threat of arrest is not.

In federal court, in the case of Biren v. City of Philadelphia, et al., these issues, and others, will be raised. But had there been an understanding of the Constitution by the police, the case would never have gotten to the point of a federal civil suit.

~

Walter Brasch, during a 40-year work career in mass communications, has been a member of several unions, in both the private and public sectors. He is a syndicated newspaper columnist and the author of 16 books, including With Just Cause: Unionization of the American Journalist. His latest book is Before the First Snow: Stories from the Revolution. He can be contacted at: walterbrasch@gmail.com.

September 24, 2011 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Militarism | Leave a comment

UK: Litigation threat made Met apologize

Press TV – September 24, 2011

The British Police have apologized and agreed to pay compensation to the man who was arrested on his way to an anti-royal demonstration after he threatened the police with legal action.

Adam Moniz was heading to the Red Lion square in central London to take part in a peaceful and authorized demonstration organized by the anti-monarchy group Republic when he was arrested by London police on the day of the wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton.

After being arrested, the police took Moniz to a police cell holding him for “anticipated breach of peace” despite having a clear criminal record and no intention of committing any offence. After six hours when the royal wedding had finished, the police released him without any charge.

His arrest was one of several pre-crime arrests that the British police committed on the day of Kate Middleton and Prince William’s wedding. Human rights campaigners referred to the indiscriminate arrests as illegal.

In a bid to justify the Metropolitan Police’s behaviour, acting detective superintendent Mark Eley, in a letter to Moniz, said: “the policing of large scale public order events and demonstrations is frequently a challenging task for police officers. It requires a careful balance of the rights and freedoms of often conflicting interests.”

Furthermore, after Moniz threatened the British police with legal action, they agreed to pay him 5,000 pounds in compensation.

September 24, 2011 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | 1 Comment

Irvine 11: Sentenced to community service, no jailtime; attorneys prepare appeal

Nora Barrows-Friedman – The Electronic Intifada – 09/24/2011

At approximately 2:35pm this afternoon in the Orange County Superior Courthouse in Santa Ana, California, the presiding judge in the Irvine 11 trial, Peter Wilson, announced his sentence following a jury’s decision to convict the students on both misdemeanor counts with which they were charged (“conspiracy to disrupt a public meeting” and “disruption of a public meeting”).

The Irvine 11 held a nonviolent civil disobedience protest during a speech by an Israeli official in February 2010 and have been fighting the charges in court since late August.

Wilson stated to the defendants and their attorneys — with nearly one hundred people present in the courtroom — that although the jury decided on guilty verdicts, he would not be sending the students to jail for the protest in which they were involved. He said that the defendants have no prior records, are productive members of their community, and acted on their beliefs, so jail time would be “inappropriate.”

He ordered the students to serve 56 hours of community service at a non-profit organization and said they were under a 3-year probation. But if they complete their service before the end of January 2012, the probation would only be for one year, and would end on 24 September 2012.

There was a palpable mood of relief in the room from friends, family members, and supporters, who just two hours before had heard that the jury returned two guilty verdicts for every defendant. When the verdicts were read by the court clerk, several people immediately burst into tears, and others stood up and walked out. One person said “there is no justice.”

Following the sentencing, the students and their attorneys held a press conference outside the courthouse, with a plethora of news media present. The attorneys and the Irvine 11 (and their families) have been under a gag order to the media for the past several months, and this was the first opportunity to hear from the students and the attorneys and ask questions.

Student Khalid Akari said:

On February 8, 2010, I stood up against the face of oppression. I stood up for the children of Palestine; children who have no voice. That day, I stood up for a purpose. I stood up for conscience. I had a message that day, a peaceful message.

Mohammad Qureashi:

As people around the world are fighting to seek a voice, I too will fight on, to seek my voice and to be heard. Because this is not a right that can be taken [away] by a district attorney; this right has been given to us by God.

Taher Herzallah:

My message is to all those activists who have been watching this story closely. All of those who speak truth to power. And all of those who challenge the status quo. Do not let this case deter you. Do not let this case falter your activism. Make this the platform to intensify activism on the Palestine issue in this country.

Shaheen Nassar:

Despite the prejudicial nature of the charges filed against us, and the actions of the University administration, I want to say that I respect the court’s decision, however I would like to emphasize how proud I am of my actions on February 8 [2010]. I intend to continue my activism, to give voice to the voiceless. Including my cousins, who died during the Gaza massacre. And the 1,400 other civilians who lost their lives during that massacre as well. May God rest their souls.

Mohamed Abdelgany, Asaad Traina and Aslan Akhtar also spoke passionately and eloquently to the crowd. The full video of the press conference will be uploaded this weekend.

Even though the sentence was relatively light, the attorneys said that they would immediately be filing an appeal to overturn the decision, and would take it all the way to the Supreme Court in order to protect legitimate protest and free speech. Attorney Lisa Holder, expressing pride in her clients, said that the students “stood up for their conscience, they stood up for their beliefs, and they stand out in a world that has become very apathetic.”

Holder added that she was excited to work with them in the future to help “overturn certain laws which are not fair and which do not allow us to voice our beliefs and to intently voice our conscience.”

Holder:

We will be appealing this decision. And we expect that there will be some changes in the laws to make room for this type of dissent, which is valid, which is important, which is critical to our democracy.

Attorney Dan Mayfield added:

Remember what the judge said in the court: that part of his reason for giving the sentence that he gave — which was a very lenient and fair sentence — was because the judge found that the young men in this case were motivated by their sincere beliefs.

[Additionally,] there is already a movement which has developed in just the 30-45 minutes since we left court: a movement of people who are pledging to do volunteer work alongside these young men. So when they do their 56 hours of volunteer work, they will bring other people with them to do volunteer work in our community. I’m very, very proud to be part of this group.

The District Attorney’s lead prosecutor, Dan Wagner, stated outside the courtroom after sentencing was read that he had wanted the students to serve jail time so it would deter future protesters.

Khalid Akari told The Electronic Intifada outside the courtroom that the guilty verdict, though he was naturally unhappy with it, has not deterred his activism. “Not at all,” he said. “I stood up for a reason that day. It would be pointless if I stopped doing it, so I will continue doing it.”

Taher Herzallah said that he was concerned that if they took a plea bargain at the beginning, and did not fight this in court, that it may not have inspired such outcry from students and the community at large. “We shouldn’t be scared,” he told The Electronic Intifada. “We should be encouraged to do these things. I hope this whole process encourages people do stand up, not discourage them.”

When asked what message he had to the Palestinian people under Israeli occupation and siege, Herzallah said that he wanted to address the mothers who have lost their sons, to those under attack.

We are with you. We did not forget about you. Here in America we’re struggling and we’re willing to make the sacrifice to give you any ease or comfort as much as possible. The battleground in America with the Zionists is not over. This was just the beginning, and we are ready to continue.

The Electronic Intifada will provide updates in the appeals process. For more information, visit the Stand With the Eleven solidarity website at www.irvine11.com.

September 23, 2011 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Solidarity and Activism | 1 Comment

Essam Aoudhi: Martyred in defense of Qusra

23 September 2011 | International Solidarity Movement, West Bank

Today Essam Kamal Abed Aoudhi, a 35 year old father of 8 children from the village of Qusra, was murdered by the Israeli army as they fired live ammunition indiscriminately into a crowd of villagers gathered in their village.

From the nearby outpost of Esh Kodesh (“Holy Head”) built entirely on stolen Qusra land, a large group of settlers left the settlement and entered the village just after 1pm and began attacking villagers and burning olive groves. As the villagers gathered to protect themselves and their land, the soldiers arrived and stood between the settlers and villagers, protecting the settlers who retreated.

Soldiers instantly began to fire tear gas canisters, rubber bullets and live ammunition directly at villagers, making no attempt to disperse but intending solely to injure.

Mohammad Abdul Odeh, age 16, was shot in the stomach with a high velocity tear gas canister as he stood on his land.

Remi Yusef Faiz Hassan, age 35, was shot with 4 rubber bullets and one dum dum from 2 meters as he peacefully walked to soldiers to ask why they allow the settlers to enter his village and burn his trees.

Sameeh Hassan, age 24, was shot in the groin with rubber bullets as he attempted to reach his olive trees and extinguish the fire destroying them.

Essam Aoudhi was shot with live ammunition as he joined his fellow villagers protesting the army’s incursion into his village. According to Dr. Sameh Abu Zaroh, a doctor at Rafidia Hospital in Nablus, the wound on Essam’s body shows that the bullet was shot from just a few meters away and from below in such a way to insure maximum injury. The bullet entered the right side of Essam’s chest and exited through the top of his back, fracturing his vertebrae in multiple places.

After Essam was carried to an ambulance, the soldiers left immediately, clearly understanding what had just happened. The people of Qusra returned to the centre of the village where children had gathered, shouting slogans expressing their anger over Essam’s martyrdom.

As the sun set in Qusra, the punishment continued, as two teenagers stumbled into the village before collapsing to the ground in pain. Both Amar Masameer, age 19, and Fathi Hassan, age 16, were arrested earlier in the day as they made their way towards Qusra’s burning olive trees.

They did not resist arrest yet returned to the village dripping with blood and faces so swollen they were barely recognisable. Once arrested, Fathi Hassan explained, settlers from the outpost had asked the soldiers detaining them for permission to beat the two boys. The soldiers did not interfere and so the settlers began stoning the boys whilst their hands where cuffed behind their backs. Amar Masameer was hit directly in the eye with a stone thrown from just a few meters and is now in Rafidia hospital awaiting treatment.

September 23, 2011 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Subjugation - Torture | Leave a comment

The Palestinian Authority’s top gun in D.C.: Benjamin Netanyahu

By Alex Kane | Mondoweiss | September 23, 2011

The Palestinian Authority’s (PA) decision to buck the United States and ask the United Nations for statehood recognition has provoked a chorus of U.S. officials to threaten the PA with a cut-off in aid, among other consequences.  But there will likely be no U.S. aid cut-off, and that’s because the PA has a powerful ally with easy access to Congress:  Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The New York Times reported this week that the Obama administration enlisted Netanyahu to convince Congress not to cut off aid to the Palestinian Authority.

This news might be confusing if you’ve only been paying attention to the conventional wisdom that the UN bid, as Ali Abunimah put it, “pit[s] Israel and the United States on one side, fiercely opposing it, and Palestinian officials and allied governments on the other.” But the reality is that Israel and the PA work closely together, and that the PA functions as a subcontractor for the Israeli occupation.  Republican calls for a cut-off in aid to the PA are just posturing.

Netanyahu knows that the PA, first and foremost, serves Israeli interests by preventing any Palestinian challenge to Israel’s occupation regime. The UN bid won’t change that. It is, as Adam Shatz aptly wrote in the London Review of Books, an “extraordinary arrangement: the security forces of a country under occupation are being subcontracted by third parties outside the region to prevent resistance to the occupying power, even as that power continues to grab more land.”

Netanyahu’s move to advocate for American funding for the PA comes on the heels of a Reuters report that showed that some Israel lobby groups are working hard to keep the PA’s coffers full with U.S. money. An Israeli government report also recently called for a continuation of aid to the PA.

Here are more details about Netanyahu lobbying for the PA from the New York Times report on September 20:

When the Obama administration wanted to be certain that Congress would not block $50 million in new aid to the Palestinian Authority last month, it turned to a singularly influential lobbyist: Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.

At the request of the American Embassy and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, Mr. Netanyahu urged dozens of members of Congress visiting Israel last month not to object to the aid, according to Congressional and diplomatic officials…

One of the members of Congress who attended the meeting with Mr. Netanyahu in August, Representative Michael G. Grimm of New York, a Republican, said that it was carefully explained to the delegation that the money would be used for training Palestinian police officers who work closely with the Israeli government…

The notifications required to Congress before releasing the aid give committee leaders the power to put holds on delivery of the aid — something the administration sought to avoid by urging Mr. Netanyahu to intervene to keep the money flowing last month. The $50 million was the last of $200 million this year in direct budget assistance to the Palestinians.

While the American aid to the Palestinians has been viewed with suspicion by some of Israel’s supporters, the Israeli government, especially through its security officials, has expressed support for it.

“Netanyahu made the pitch to members at the request of the secretary and embassy,” a Congressional official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss private diplomatic discussions.

Any future Republican calls for a cut-off in U.S. assistance to the PA, which is at $600 million a year, will just be bluster meant to twist the arms of Mahmoud Abbas for daring to not listen to U.S. dictates.  AIPAC and the rest of the lobby that follows the Likud Party line will make sure that it remains bluster.

Alex Kane is a New York City-based freelance journalist who blogs on Israel/Palestine at alexbkane.wordpress.com. Follow him on Twitter @alexbkane.

September 23, 2011 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Timeless or most popular, Wars for Israel | Leave a comment