Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Another call to arrest climate “deniers”

By Eric Worrall | Watts Up With That? | April 7, 2015

Adam Weinstein, of the Gawker, has added his voice to the growing list of greens, who demand a brutal authoritarian response to the vexing problem of people who have a different opinion.

According to Weinstein;

Man-made climate change happens. Man-made climate change kills a lot of people. It’s going to kill a lot more. We have laws on the books to punish anyone whose lies contribute to people’s deaths. It’s time to punish the climate-change liars.

This is an argument that’s just being discussed seriously in some circles. It was laid out earlier this month, with all the appropriate caveats, by Lawrence Torcello, a philosophy professor at the Rochester Institute of Technology.

Weinstein bases his claim that man made climate change “kills a lot of people” on a WHO page, which estimates that 150,000 people per annum are dying because of climate related extreme weather and other problems, such as crop failure.

However, this claim simply doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. Even the IPCC has failed to establish a link between CO2 and extreme weather. In addition, the rise in CO2 has so far been strongly beneficial for crop yields – satellites have detected a substantial greening of the planet, thanks largely to the fertilisation effect of the rise in atmospheric CO2.

In recent years we have all seen a worrying surge of hate speech against climate skeptics, and a disturbing level of political acquiescence in the face of murderous fantasy and intolerance. These incidents include a government sponsored celebration of climate murder in a theatre production, MSM cartoons celebrating political violence, more cartoons, proposals for soviet style forced “reeducation”, calls for the death penalty, calls for “deniers” to be jailed, wishes for divine retribution against “deniers”, the gruesome 10:10 video fantasy about murdering the children of “deniers”, and prominent environmentalist David Suzuki’s repeated calls for “deniers” to be jailed, here, and here. There have been far too many threats against the liberty and lives of ordinary people, whose crime against humanity is to believe that 18 years with no change in global temperature, might be an indication that the climate “crisis” has been exaggerated.

April 9, 2015 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

When Free Speech Becomes Dead Silence – The Israel Lobby And A Cowed Academia

Media Lens | April 8, 2015

The sudden cancellation of an academic conference on Israel, as well as the lack of outcry from ‘mainstream’ media, demonstrates once again the skewed limits to ‘free speech’ in ‘advanced’ Western democracies. ‘Je suis Charlie’ already feels like ancient history. It certainly does not apply when it comes to scrutiny of the state of Israel.

The conference, titled ‘International Law and the State of Israel: Legitimacy, Responsibility and Exceptionalism’, was to be held at the University of Southampton from 15-17 April 2015. Planned speakers included Richard Falk, the former UN special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories, Gabi Piterberg, a historian at the University of California at Los Angeles, Israeli academic Ilan Pappé and Palestinian historian Nur Musalha.

The meeting was billed as the ‘first of its kind and constitutes a ground-breaking historical event on the road towards justice and enduring peace in historic Palestine.’ The approach would be scholarly with ‘multidisciplinary debate reflecting diverse perspectives, and thus genuine disagreements’. Rather than being a coven of political extremists and violent hotheads, this was to be a serious gathering of respected and authoritative academics with in-depth knowledge of Israel and Palestine.

But intense pressure from the Israel lobby about the airing of ‘anti-Semitic views’ has torpedoed the University of Southampton’s earlier stated commitment to uphold ‘freedom of speech within the law’. In a classic piece of bureaucratic hand-wringing, the university issued a corporate-style statement on 1 April that leaned heavily on the pretext of ‘health and safety’ to kill off the conference. This happened a mere two weeks before the conference, planned months earlier in consultation with the university, was due to begin.

The Board of Deputies of British Jews was among those Zionist groups that had been urging the university to cancel the event. Its president, Vivian Wineman, said:

‘It is formulated in extremist terms, has attracted toxic speakers and is likely to result in an increase in anti-Semitism and tension on campus.’

The Telegraph reported that ‘at least two major patrons of the university were considering withdrawing their financial support. One is a charitable foundation, the other a wealthy family.’

There was also fierce criticism from several politicians at Westminster. Mark Hoban, the Conservative MP for Fareham, described the conference as a ‘provocative, hard-line, one-sided forum that would question and delegitimize the existence of a democratic state.’ Caroline Nokes, MP for Romsey and Southampton North, said the university risked bringing itself into disrepute by hosting what she described as ‘an apparently one-sided event’.

A senior government minister even got involved. Eric Pickles, Secretary of State for Communities, derided the conference as a ‘one-sided diatribe’. He went further:

‘There is a careful line between legitimate academic debate on international law and the actions of governments, and the far-left’s bashing of Israel which often descends into naked anti-Semitism.’

This was outrageous high-level political interference in free speech. When the university confirmed that it was cancelling the conference, the decision was predictably welcomed by the Israeli embassy in London:

‘This was a clear instance of an extremist political campaign masquerading as an academic exercise, and it is only right to recognise that respecting free speech does not mean tolerating intolerance.’

Michael Gove, the Government Chief Whip and former Secretary of State for Education, could barely contain his glee:

‘It was not a conference, it was an anti-Israel hate-fest.’

The ‘Health And Safety’ Pretext

On April 2, the conference organisers responded to the university’s sudden reversal of its earlier commitment to hold the conference. The organisers, who include Israeli-born law professor Oren Ben-Dor, said that they were ‘shocked and dismayed’ at the university’s about-turn. This was especially disappointing given that the police had given assurances that they would be ‘able to manage the demonstrations’.

The organisers noted that ‘general sensitivity following recent terrorist events in Europe’ had been ‘misused to inflate the risks’ of the conference going ahead. More widely, warned the organisers, the implications for academic freedom would be dire:

‘The stakes for academic public space, for academic freedom and for freedom of speech are too high. The message it sends to other academic institutions and to students all over the world is grave and depressing. It will potentially make campuses obedient and depoliticised, distant and docile corporate spaces.’

An inadvertent clue to the reality underlying the university’s rhetoric on ‘security’ and ‘health and safety’ could be found in a report last month in the Jewish Chronicle. Board of Deputies of British Jews president Wineman told the Chronicle that:

‘When we had a meeting with the university vice-chancellor they said they would review it [the conference] on health and safety terms.

‘The two lines of attack [sic] possible were legal and health and safety and they were leaning on that one.’

The ‘line of attack’ about ‘health and safety’, then, appears to be cover for the university caving in to pro-Israel pressure. This fits a wider pattern of the pro-Israel lobby’s fear of increasing global condemnation of Israeli crimes against the Palestinian people and international law. As Ben White, an authoritative freelance journalist on the Middle East, reported last month, the British ambassador to Israel, Matthew Gould, recently met with UK university heads to discuss Israel and the limits of ‘freedom of speech’. Also present were representatives of at least three pro-Israel organisations: the Board of Deputies of British Jews, the Jewish Leadership Council, and the Union of Jewish Students.

Southampton University’s refusal at the time to buckle under pro-Israel lobby pressure was cited in the meeting. White noted:

‘This stubborn commitment to freedom of speech has clearly angered Britain’s Israel lobby, but the bigger question here is why a UK ambassador was involved in the first place.’

When pressed to explain this, a Foreign Office spokesperson told White that ‘part of Matthew Gould’s role involves outreach to the British Jewish Community.’ White added:

‘The spokesperson did not elaborate on whether lobbying British universities was part of the ambassador’s remit.’

The conference organisers have now lodged an injunction at the High Court in London in an attempt to prevent the university from curtailing their right to freedom of speech. The legal argument is that in unfairly withdrawing permission for the conference, the university has capitulated to the pro-Israel lobby. ‘This is blatant censorship under the guise of a specter of campus being overrun by violent hordes, which is patently groundless,’ said Mark McDonald, a public interest lawyer from the chambers of Michael Mansfield QC.

Many academics have protested the university’s decision. David Gurnham, the Director of Research at the university’s School of Law, wrote in an email to vice-chancellor Professor Don Nutbeam:

‘It seems to me outrageous that you seem to have allowed the bullying and threats of the Israeli lobby to prevent the perfectly lawful and legitimate exercise of free speech and academic debate. I understand that the police had reported that they would be perfectly able and willing to deal with any security concerns at the event: this ought to be good enough.

‘Cancelling the event in this way makes the University look weak, spineless and reactionary. I am proud to be a member of academic staff here, but your decision to withdraw support for a conference in this manner makes me, and I’m sure very many others like me, seriously question the University’s commitment to open and free debate.’

(More letters of protest from academics can be read here.)

All this comes at a time when the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement is gathering strength. A recent debate at the Cambridge Union Society even passed the motion that ‘This House Believes Israel Is A Rogue State’.

At the time of writing, a petition calling for the University of Southampton to uphold free speech has attracted almost 10,000 signatures in just one week (it took a Zionist petition in favour of cancelling the conference one month to reach around 6,500).

An earlier petition in support of the conference was signed by round 900 academics around the world.

All of this must make the pro-Israel lobby deeply uncomfortable. As Ben White observed:

‘Whatever the final outcome, this story is significant for the way in which it illustrates not so much the pro-Israel lobby’s power, but its weaknesses.’

No More ‘Je Suis Charlie’

Media coverage of the cancellation of the conference has been almost non-existent. We found just three news articles in the national press: one in the Guardian, one in the Telegraph and one in the Express.

But what is even more glaring than the lack of news coverage is the editorial silence on the pro-Israel lobby’s bullying and intimidation. What happened to all those grand declarations from editorial offices, under the banner ‘Je suis Charlie’, to uphold freedom of speech and the ‘right to offend’? The journalists and cartoonists who were murdered at the Charlie Hebdo offices in Paris were, we were told, ‘martyrs for freedom of speech’. The atrocity was ‘a war declared on civilisation’, ‘an attack on the free world’, ‘an assault on journalists and free speech’. A Guardian editorial proclaimed:

‘If there is a right to free speech, implicit within it there has to be a right to offend. Any society that’s serious about liberty has to defend the free flow of ugly words, even ugly sentiments.’

Where is the outpouring of dismay now from liberal commentators across the British media at the actions of the pro-Israel lobby? Where are the comment pieces decrying this latest attack on free speech? When it comes to Israel, the ‘right to offend’ is quietly dropped.

Moreover, why should it be ‘toxic’ to examine critically the founding ideology of Israel, a state that was built on one of the largest forced migrations in modern history? As Israeli historian Ilan Pappé documented in his acclaimed 2006 book, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, the establishment of Israel in 1948 was ‘Nakba’ – a catastrophe – for the Palestinians. More than half of Palestine’s native population, close to 800,000 people, were uprooted, and over 500 Palestinian villages destroyed.

Nakba largely remains a taboo subject for ‘mainstream’ coverage of the Middle East. Indeed, notes Pappé, the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians by Israel is a ‘crime [that] has been erased almost totally from the global public memory’. This crime, he continues:

‘has been systematically denied, and is still today not recognised as an historical fact, let alone acknowledged as a crime that needs to be confronted politically as well as morally.’ (Ibid., p. xiii)

Sadly, the fear of offending the powerful pro-Israel lobby remains a major factor in British politics, cultural debate and media reporting of Israel and Palestine (see Peter Oborne’s Dispatches documentary for Channel 4 in 2009). As one senior BBC television news producer revealed to Professor Greg Philo of the Glasgow Media Group:

‘We wait in fear for the telephone call from the Israelis.’

‘The Specious Slur Of Anti-Semitism’

In a moving piece of personal testimony, Professor Suleiman Sharkh of the University of Southampton, one of the conference organisers, published an open letter. He said:

‘I grew up in Gaza, but my family is originally from a town called Majdal Asqlan (now called Ashkelon by Israel). In November 1948, six months after the establishment of the State of Israel and after the wars had ended, the town was bombed and many people were killed. Those who survived were herded towards Gaza, crawling on their hands and knees in the thorny field. Since then we have lived in squalid refugee camps. I walked around in the sand soiled by the open sewers with my bare feet. I got my first shoes when I went to school at the age of six.’

Professor Sharkh then explained the relevance and importance of the conference to Palestinian people:

‘International Law was responsible for our misery. It was used to legalise the theft of our homes and it continues to be used to legalise the ongoing oppression of my people by the State of Israel. The questions asked by the conference are therefore questions that I have been asking all my life. They are important questions that need to be answered.’

The conference is now likely to go ahead at an alternative venue to be publicised soon.

The journalist and filmmaker John Pilger, whose powerful documentary Palestine Is Still The Issue is a must-see, told Media Lens (email, April 3, 2015):

‘Israel is a gangster state. It holds the world record in the breach and defiance of international law. It regularly massacres and terrorises the Palestinian civilian population of Gaza, which even David Cameron has described as an “open prison”. Its courts uphold racism as state policy. It has re-elected a congenital liar as its prime minister. Its historians have long revealed the criminality of its beginning — the theft of land, the murder and brutalising of the indigenous population.’

He continued:

‘What Israel has, however, are powerful collaborators, who, even at the lowest rung, are able to intimidate institutional bureaucrats and others with the specious slur of anti-Semitism. In Britain, the Jewish Chronicle and the Board of Deputies operate this barely disguised smear as efficiently as a metronome. They, and others, have now helped silence a much needed conference on Israel at the University of Southampton. But they should not be wholly blamed. The collusion of the university authorities as they run up the false flag of “security concerns” is to blame; and the memory of every murdered child in Gaza is now their spectre. And along with the so-called “lobby”, they cannot win.’

Pilger concluded:

‘The rest of humanity has long recognised the truth about Israel, as every international survey shows. With exquisite timing, student unions across the UK are joining the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement that is sweeping country after country, including the United States. The craven decision of Southampton will speed its progress; nothing is surer.’

Suggested Action

Please sign this petition in support of the conference.

Academics can also sign this statement of support.

April 8, 2015 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , | Leave a comment

Southampton faces outcry from staff and public over cancelled Israel conference

MEMO | April 7, 2015

The University of Southampton is facing a public outcry and discontent from staff over its cancellation of a conference on Israel and international law.

After months of pressure from pro-Israel advocacy groups, university officials announced last week that the event would not take place due to concerns over ‘health and safety’.

Since organisers revealed that Southampton was pulling the plug, more than 9,300 people have signed a petition calling for the university to “uphold free speech & allow the conference on Israel and international law to proceed.”

Within the university itself, more than 30 researchers, lecturers and professors at Southampton have joined a list of some 900 academics expressing support for the conference.

The Southampton signatories include David Gurnham, the School of Law’s Director of Research, Professor Michael Kelly OBE, Head of Modern Languages, and Professor Malcolm H Levitt FRS.

In addition, the Vice-Chancellor has received emails from a number of staff unhappy about the decision to drop the conference, some of whom have published their letters publicly.

Among them was an email from Dr. A.M. Viens, Associate Professor in Law and the interim director of the Law School’s Centre for Health Ethics and Law (HEAL). Dr. Viens urged the administration to reconsider, so as to “take a strong stance of academic freedom.”

In a sign of the growing dissatisfaction, Chief Operating Office Steve White has asked staff to channel concerns through their line manager, “who should reassure them that the University will be monitoring and responding to any developments.”

Any “further concerns” are to be directed to a “HR hotline.”

Meanwhile, the British Committee for the Universities of Palestine (BRICUP) has called the cancellation “unprecedented”, and condemned the University for “allowing political pressure to determine its academic activities.”

According to Professor Jonathan Rosenhead, chair of BRICUP, “in living memory no academic conference at a UK university has been cancelled due to external political pressure.” He added: “Southampton’s decision sets an atrocious precedent that must be reversed. If not it deserves to be treated as a pariah by the rest of the academic community.”

Organisers are currently pursuing a legal challenge, with further developments expected this week.

April 7, 2015 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment

FBI Uncovers Another Of Its Own Plots, Senator Feinstein Responds By Saying We Should Censor The Internet

By Mike Masnick | Techdirt | April 3, 2015

As you may have heard, yesterday the FBI “uncovered” yet another of its own terrorist plots, the latest in a very long line of “terrorist plots” the FBI has “uncovered” — in which the details always show that it was an undercover FBI “informant” (often doing this to get off leniently for some other issue), who more or less goads hapless, naive people, into a “plot” that had no real chance of ever happening. This appears to be the same sort of thing.

Still, politicians never leave an opportunity like this unexploited, and so in jumps Senator Dianne Feinstein, arguing that the only proper way to deal with this is to, of course… censor the internet:

I am particularly struck that the alleged bombers made use of online bombmaking guides like the Anarchist Cookbook and Inspire Magazine. These documents are not, in my view, protected by the First Amendment and should be removed from the Internet.

For what it’s worth, Dianne Feinstein’s “view” is wrong. The Anarchist Cookbook is very much protected by the First Amendment. While the book is banned in other countries, who don’t have the equivalent of the First Amendment, it’s perfectly legal in the US. The FBI/DOJ has extensively investigated the Anarchist’s Cookbook in particular over the years, and as far back as 1997 directly told Senator Feinstein that she could not ban it. This is from the DOJ back in 1997:

Senator Feinstein introduced legislation during the last Congress in an attempt to fill this gap. The Department of Justice agrees that it would be appropriate and beneficial to adopt further legislation to address this problem directly, if that can be accomplished in a manner that does not impermissibly restrict the wholly legitimate publication and teaching of such information, or otherwise violate the First Amendment.

The First Amendment would impose substantial constraints on any attempt to proscribe indiscriminately the dissemination of bombmaking information. The government generally may not, except in rare circumstances, punish persons either for advocating lawless action or for disseminating truthful information — including information that would be dangerous if used — that such persons have obtained lawfully.

And yet, Feinstein’s first response to the FBI uncovering yet another of its own plots is to go back to trying to censoring the internet in direct violation of the First Amendment? Yikes.

Oh, and even worse… in keeping with the fact that this plot was actually created by the FBI itself, guess where the two “terrorist wannabes” got the Anarchist Cookbook? From the undercover FBI agent! From the criminal complaint itself [pdf]:

On or about Novermber 2, 2014, the UC [Undercover Officer] met with VELNTZAS and SIDDIQUI. When VELENTZAS was reading a book called “Chemistry: The Central Science,” the UC asked how this book was going to benefit them. VELENTZAS stated that they could practice at her house, but could not leave any residue. The UC stated that practicing at the house was not a good idea because the people living in the apartment below VELENTZAS might hear loud noises, referring to noises from explosions. VELENTZAS said she could always tell her neighbors that she dropped some bookshelves. The UC and VELENTZAS then discussed the fact that the UC had downloaded The Anarchist Cookbook. VELENTZAS suggested the UC print out the parts of the book that they would need. During the conversation, the UC stated, “We read chemistry books with breakfast. Like, who does that?” VELENTZAS responded, “People who want to make history.”

The complaint also lists many other books and magazines and web pages that the various people read throughout, and later has one of the wannabe terrorists thanking the undercover agent for introducing The Anarchist’s Cookbook to her.

As for the other document that Feinstein wants to censor, Inspire is Al Qaeda’s magazine. And, again, reading through the complaint you see that it was actually the undercover agent who brought the magazine. The wannabe terrorist did ask the undercover agent to get it, and eventually it was the undercover agent who actually got it. Velentzas keeps asking the undercover agent to find a copy of Inspire, over and over again in the complaint until eventually the agent complies:

On or about December 24, 2014, the UC visited VELENTZAS and brought the Spring 2014 issue of Inspire magazine, as previously requested by VELENTZAS.

In other words, in neither case did the would be terrorists get the “bad” material from the internet. In both cases it came from the undercover FBI agent.

Meanwhile, it seems like the only real result of this ridiculous statement will be for Feinstein to drive ever more awareness to the old Anarchist’s Cookbook, so yet another generation of teenagers can discover it and think they’ve found something totally cool online.

April 3, 2015 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment

Sixteen Legislators Currently Imprisoned By Israel, Soldiers Kidnap Leftist Legislator Khaleda Jarrar

By Saed Bannoura | IMEMC News | April 2, 2015

The Palestinian Prisoners Society (PPS) has reported that Israel is currently holding captive sixteen democratically elected legislators, including Khalida Jarrar, who was kidnapped earlier Thursday.

The PPS issued a press release stating the nine of the imprisoned Palestinian legislators are held under arbitrary Administrative Detention, without charges or trial.

The Nine are Hasan Yousef, Abdul-Jaber Foqaha, Mohammad Jamal Natsha, Mohammad Bader, ‘Azzam Salhab, Nayef Rajoub, Bassem Za’arir, Mohammad Abu Teir and Abdul-Rahman Zeidan.

The PSS added that five legislators have been sentenced to different terms, including Marwan Barghouthi, who was kidnapped by the army in 2002, and was sentenced to five life terms, and legislator Ahmad Sa’adat, the secretary-general of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), who was kidnapped in 2006, and was sentenced in 2008 to 30 years.

Israel is also holding captive legislators Nizar Ramadan, Hosni al-Bourini, Riyad Raddad, in addition to the head of the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) Dr. ‘Aziz Dweik.

Earlier on Thursday, soldiers stormed the home of legislator Khalida Jarrar, in the central West Bank city of Ramallah, and kidnapped her.

jarrar_khalidaMedia sources in Ramallah said at least sixty Israeli soldiers, and security officers, invaded Ramallah, before storming into the home of the feminist leader, and prominent human rights advocate, and violently searched her property, before kidnapping her.

The sources said the soldiers kicked down the door of Jarrar’s home, and held her husband in a separate room, while searching the property, and kidnapped the legislator.

Jarrar is also a senior political leader of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), former executive director of the Addameer Prisoner Support and Human Rights Association, and a current member of its board.

The Legislator is also the chairwoman of the Prisoners’ Committee of the Palestinian Legislator Council (PLC).

The Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network has reported that Israel has been denying Jarrar the right to travel outside of Palestine since 1988, and that, in 2010, it took a public campaign lasting for six months before the Israeli Authorities allowed her to travel to Jordan for medical treatment.

On August 20 2014, Jarrar received an Israeli military order instructing her to leave Ramallah to Jericho, within 24 hours, but in September of the same year, the legislator managed to overturn the order.

Her abduction now raises concern that the Israeli Authorities might be planning to force her out of Ramallah, or to imprison her for an extended period.

April 2, 2015 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance, Subjugation - Torture | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Performance-Activist Preacher Gets Charges Dropped

By Steven Wishnia | Dissent News Wire | April 1, 2015

Members of New York’s Church of Stop Shopping can say “Hallelujah!”—or “Earthalujah!,” as is their wont. This morning, criminal charges stemming from a Black Lives Matter protest last January were dismissed against their preacher, William “Reverend Billy” Talen.

Talen was arrested while “sermonizing” during a 24-hour vigil in Grand Central Station Jan. 6. The vigil, one of almost daily protests in the commuter-rail station’s concourse after a grand jury declined to indict the police officer who killed Eric Garner in August, arrayed placards with the names of people killed by police on the marble floor. Police said Talen pushed an officer after refusing to remove the placards. A video shows officers picking them up while Talen gesticulates in activist-evangelist schtick, and a white-shirted police inspector grabbing his arms. He was charged with disorderly conduct and obstructing governmental administration.

“I was arrested while speaking on behalf of Black Lives Matter,” Talen said in an email to supporters. “Five kinds of police stood there watching: Homeland Security, NY state troopers, National Guard, NYPD, and police from the [Metropolitan Transportation Authority], whose officers did the handcuffing. Later, sitting in the jail cell, I listened to the police try to decide what to charge me with. I was given the usual protest charges of Disorderly Conduct and Obstruction. These charges are a complete fiction and videotapes showed this within hours of the We Will Not Be Silent rally. That evidence was available to the District Attorney’s office eleven weeks ago.”

In February, Talen was offered a conditional discharge, in which charges would be dropped if he didn’t get arrested for six months, but he refused to take it. His lawyer said the charges were “just not true” and that police were harassing him.

“The 1st Amendment is rising again,” Talen wrote. “The five freedoms—worship, speech, press, assembly and petition—suffer when we’re at war. Security trumps freedom. Even Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus. But 9/11 was 15 years ago.”

He is also suing the MTA, the agency that runs New York’s subway, bus, and commuter-rail system, for defamation, because a spokesperson told the New York Post that he had physically attacked police.

April 2, 2015 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Solidarity and Activism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Palestinian woman sentenced to 70 months in jail

Ma’an – 01/04/2015

194627JENIN – An Israeli military court on Tuesday sentenced a Palestinian woman to 70 months in jail, with a suspended sentence of 24 months, a local foundation said.

Muhjat al-Quds Foundation for Prisoners and Martyrs said Muna Qadan, 43, was arrested from her house on Nov. 13, 2012 and has attended over 22 court hearings since. She is currently being held at Hasharon prison and has been ordered to pay a fine of 30,000 shekels.

Qadan, from Arraba village near Jenin, is the sister of jailed Islamic Jihad leader Tariq Qadan, and the fiance of another Islamic Jihad leader serving a life term in Israeli jails, Ibrahim Ighbariya.

Qadan has previously spent over four years in Israeli jails on several terms for being associated with the political group Islamic Jihad, and was one of the prisoners freed in the 2011 Shalit prisoner swap deal. Rights groups criticized Qadan’s rearrest as clear violation of the terms of the prisoner swap.

The Qadan family has been active in resistance activities within Israeli prisons. Tariq engaged in a life-threatening hunger strike in February 2013, while Muna threatened Israeli authorities with a jail-wide hunger strike in June 2013 in response to Israeli denial of medical treatment to fellow detainee Lina al-Jarbouni.

The majority of Palestinian political organizations are considered illegal by Israel, and association with such parties is often used as grounds for imprisonment, according to Prisoner Support and Human Rights Association Addameer.

The use by Israel of political affiliation as punishable by imprisonment has brought international criticism. Political prisoners held in Israeli jails routinely face isolation, torture, medical neglect, denial of family visits, as well as denial of fair legal processes, as reported by Addameer.

April 1, 2015 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance, Subjugation - Torture | , , , | Leave a comment

From Gaza To Southampton – We Are All Palestinians

By Gilad Atzmon | April 1, 2015

For the second time in just a month, a British academic institution has been intimidated by an orchestrated Zionist lobby.

Yesterday we learned that Southampton University has decided to withdraw its permission to hold the academic conference on International Law and the State of Israel. The decision was taken on the grounds of “health and safety” with the university claiming it did not have enough resources to mitigate the “risks.”

This comes just one month after the Royal Northern College Of Music cancelled a concert of mine for similar safety reasons. Like Southampton University, the RNCM was bullied by a violent pro-Israel group and it took us only a few hours to learn that the spokesperson for the pro-Israeli body was an infamous crook as well as a football hooligan (see here).

This raises the immediate question: Is it possible that like the Palestinians, British academia is now also subject to Zionist terror?

The vile campaign against the Southampton Conference was led by the Board Of Deputies of British Jews, a body that claims to represent Jews in Britain. So far, not one single British Jewish body has stood up for the conference and for elementary academic freedom nor has a single Jewish institution criticised the Board of Deputies’ campaign against British academic institutes.  I guess that the meaning of it is as simple as it is devastating: We now see a clear conflict between the Jewish community and those precious British values of tolerance and academic freedom.

Recently, Jewish community leaders have been concerned by the rise of anti-Semitism in Britain. In this connection, I would use this opportunity to remind them that Jewish institutional bullying of British academic institutes does not reflect well on British Jewry. In fact it has a most disastrous effect.

So, as we witness this devastating continuum between Gaza and Britain we once again come to realise that the plight of the Palestinians is not an isolated event in contemporary world affairs or history.

Brits are also now subject to Zionist  terror and the meaning of it is simple: Now, more than ever we are all Palestinians.

April 1, 2015 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Leave a comment

Famed political prisoner, Mumia Abu-Jamal in critical condition

By Herb Boyd | Amsterdam News | March 31, 2015

4f0e16551e795.image_t750x550Mumia Abu-Jamal, one of the world’s most prominent and celebrated political prisoners, is reportedly in a diabetic coma and in intensive care at the Schuylkill Medical Center in Pottsville, PA.

According to emails from his contingent of supporters, Abu-Jamal was taken to the hospital facility on Monday “Shackled to the bed, alone, and prevented from knowing that his family is close by he remains in intensive care. Prison officials and hospital officials when not spreading misinformation are denying Mumia’s family access to visits, while also denying the family and his lawyers any information or records about his condition.”

His brother, Keith Cook stated “The rules that the prisons have are very arcane. They don’t give out any information about prisoners to their families or anyone else. It’s like you have your hands tied because you don’t know how the prisoner is and you have no way of talking to him. I remember a month ago— Phil Africa exercising in the prison, next thing they know they moved him to a hospital and didn’t tell his family where he was, and three days later he was dead.”

As of Tuesday morning, the family has been given access to see Abu-Jamal who has been incarcerated since 1982 for the murder of Police Officer Daniel Faulkner. Long the subject of countless rallies and demonstrations with protesters, like him, proclaiming his innocence, he spent years on death row before being removed three years ago and now serving a life sentence.

Veteran activist and a close associate of Abu-Jamal, Pam Africa was outraged by the treatment and conditions he was enduring. “Prison officials are lying,” she said. “Mumia is going through torture at the hands of the Department of Corrections through medical neglect. It is clear to people that they want to kill Mumia. They gave him the wrong medication which made his condition worse.

“Inmates on the inside who questioned what was happening have been subjected to direct retaliation by the superintendent,” Africa continued. “They have been moving concerned inmates out of Mumia’s unit in an effort to both bury and keep this critical information from the public.”

Ms. Africa was unable to talk extensively when called since she was at the hospital and at a press conference with an aim toward dealing with prison officials.

And dealing with officials of the state, those directly linked to repression and oppression is something Abu-Jamal has a long acquaintance and a relentless resistance. “Armed resistance to slavery, repression, and the racist delusion of white supremacy runs deep in African American experience and history,” he wrote in his book We Want Freedom—A Life in the Black Panther Party. “When it emerged in the mid-1960s from the Black Panther Party and other nationalist or revolutionary organizations, it was perceived and popularly projected as aberrant. This could only be professed by those who know little about the long and protracted history of armed resistance by Africans and their truest allies. The Black Panther Party emerged from the deepest traditions of Africans in America—resistance to negative, negrophobia, dangerous threats to Black life, by any means necessary.”

Another stalwart in the liberation fight for Abu-Jamal is Professor Johanna Fernandez who cited that “Mumia has been complaining about being ill since January. If he had gotten the proper care he needed originally, he would not be in this situation. This crisis illustrates the problem of health care in American prisons as a basic human rights violation. I am personally concerned because Phil Africa of the MOVE organization was rushed to the hospital not long ago in good health and a few days later he was dead. We need to fight to defend Mumia’s life, and that of all prisoners.”

March 31, 2015 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance, Subjugation - Torture | , , , | Leave a comment

University of Southampton cancels Israel conference, citing ‘health and safety’

MEMO | March 31, 2015

The University of Southampton has withdrawn permission for a conference next month on Israel and international law, citing “health and safety” concerns.

The university has been under significant pressure from pro-Israel lobby groups in the UK to cancel the conference, despite legal obligations to protect free speech.

Conference organisers confirmed Tuesday morning with “extreme astonishment and sadness” that Southampton authorities have pulled the plug on the gathering.

We were told that the decision was taken on the grounds of health and safety: a number of groups may be demonstrating for or against the conference which could present risks to the safety of the participants, students and staff. The University claims that it does not have enough resources to mitigate the risks, despite a clear statement from the Police confirming that they are able to deal with the protest and ensure the security of the event.

In their statement, organisers say that they are “extremely dissatisfied with the risk assessment conducted by the University”, where “high risks remained high even when seemingly effective mitigating measures were put in place.”

Organisers claim that the “security argument” has been used “to rationalise a decision to cancel the conference that has been taken under public pressure of the Israeli Lobby”, calling it a “sad decision for freedom of speech.”

Conference organisers say that they will now “explore legal emergency measures to prevent the University from cancelling the conference, to reverse its decision and to properly collaborate with the police so that the demonstrations can be managed.”

March 31, 2015 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Leave a comment

Reporters arrested in Ferguson sue St. Louis police

RT | March 31, 2015

Four journalists are suing St. Louis police over their arrests during the Ferguson, Missouri protests last August. They claim to have been detained and mistreated by the officers even though their press credentials were in plain view.

The suit was filed Monday by US citizen Ryan Devereaux of The Intercept and three German nationals residing in the US – Ansgar Graw of Die Welt, Frank Herrmann of the Rheinische Post group and freelance reporter Lukas Hermsmeier.

“This was a very new experience,” Graw wrote following his release. He had visited many disputed areas and conflict zones, from Gaza and Georgia to Iraq and Cuba. “But to be arrested and yelled at and be rudely treated by police? For that I had to travel to Ferguson and St. Louis in the United States of America.”

The four plaintiffs are charging the St. Louis Police Department with “intentionally and willfully” subjecting them to “violations of freedom of the press and free speech” for the purpose of “obstructing, chilling, deterring, and retaliating” against reporters covering the unrest in the Missouri town.

According to the San Francisco-based Freedom of the Press Foundation, 24 journalists were arrested in Ferguson between August and November 2014, including RT’s Denise Reese.

Protests broke out following the August 9 shooting death of Michael Brown, 18, by Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson. In addition to police officers from nearby departments, Missouri authorities deployed the National Guard, banned all assembly and even established a no-fly zone over Ferguson.

At the time, the authorities said officers had difficulty telling reporters apart from the protesting activists. In their complaint, Graw and Herrmann allege they were detained while carrying their cameras and wearing press badges around their necks. Hermsmeier and Devereaux claim they had shown the officers their media credentials before they were shot at with rubber bullets and arrested.

The complaint names the St. Louis County Police and the County of St. Louis, as well as 20 officers identified only as “John Doe,” as they refused to disclose their names to the reporters at the time of the arrests. One officer reportedly introduced himself as “Donald Duck.” The plaintiffs demand unspecified punitive damages and a jury trial.

Last week, the St. Louis County Police, city police and the Missouri Highway Patrol agreed to settle a federal lawsuit by six Ferguson protesters over the use of tear gas and other chemical agents against the demonstrators.

READ MORE: Revealed: Ferguson no-fly zone was meant to keep media away

March 31, 2015 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment

Spanish Congress Approves Draconian Laws Essentially Sending Spain Back to the Dark Ages

By Erin Gallagher | Revolution News | March 27, 2015

Yesterday three laws widely criticized by the opposition and human rights groups were approved in Spanish Congress. The Penal Code, the new Anti-Terror Law and the Law on Citizen Safety. The three new texts challenge freedom of expression in the streets and on the Internet. All three laws are scheduled to go into effect July 1, 2015.

Law on Citizen Safety (Gag Law)

“The gag law is revenge against social movements that emerged after 15M” – Patricia Martin, Avaaz

Under the new Citizen Safety Law or Ley Mordaza (Gag Law) as human rights defenders have renamed it, public protests, freedoms of speech and the press and documenting police abuses will become crimes punishable by heavy fines and/or jail. Some key points on the Ley Mordaza:

  • Photographing or recording police – 600 to 30.000€ fine.
  • Peaceful disobedience to authority – 600 to 30.000€ fine.
  • Occupying banks as means of protest – 600 to 30.000€ fine.
  • Not formalizing a protest – 600 to 30.000€ fine.
  • For carrying out assemblies or meetings in public spaces – 100 to 600€ fine.
  • For impeding or stopping an eviction – 600 to 30.000€ fine.
  • For presence at an occupied space (not only social centers but also houses occupied by evicted families) – 100 to 600€ fine.
  • Police black lists for protesters, activists and alternative press have been legalized.
  • Meeting or gathering in front of Congress – 600 to 30.000€ fine.
  • Appealing the fines in court requires the payment of judicial costs, whose amount depends on the fine.
  • It allows random identity checks, allowing for racial profiling of immigrants and minorities.
  • Police can now carry out raids at their discretion, without the need for “order” to have been disrupted.
  • External bodily searches are also now allowed at police discretion.
  • The government can prohibit any protest at will, if it feels “order” will be disrupted.
  • Any ill-defined “critical infrastructure” is now considered a forbidden zone for public gatherings if it might affect their functioning.
  • There are also fines for people who climb buildings and monuments without permission. (This has been a common method of protest from organizations like Greenpeace.)

The Gag Law will also affect internet freedoms as tweets calling for demonstrations or protests may be subject to penalties and fines for organizers. While an individual user may not be considered “an organizer” it could also be construed to include anyone who disseminates a call to protest through any media, including social media.

“This is the worst cut of rights and freedoms since the Franco regime,” – Virginia Pérez Alonso, PDLI

As the Ley Mordaza makes it illegal to publish photos of the police or other authorities without permission, sharing those images on social media could also be considered a felony resulting in a fine up to 30,000 euros.

Reform of the Penal Code (Código Penal)

Reforms to the Código Penal include some vague and controversial wording that could have wider implications involving copyright, cyberactivism and online porn. Below we will outline some of the points in question.

Copyright and Downloads

Reform of the Copyright Act was already approved but the new Penal Code reform also covers cases of copyright infringement imposing a penalty of six months to four years in prison for those who, among other things, “facilitate access or localization” of works that are being shared without permission of the owners with the intention of obtaining a direct or indirect financial gain.

Another controversial section refers to those who “intentionally store copies of works” to be aimed at public communication which is a crime. Article 270 mentions imprisonment for those who provide methods or systems to remove anti-copy protection of specific content.

The new Penal Code imposes imprisonment from six months to three years those who, for commercial purposes, manufacture, import, put into circulation, design, produce, adapt or perform to facilitate the removal or circumvention of any technical device that was used to protect computer programs or any other works.

Revenge Porn & Child Pornography

The new Penal Code imposes penalties for revenge porn and child pornography. Under Article 197 terms of incarceration for revenge porn range from three months to one year. Article 189 contains new wording regarding the definition of child pornography referring to any material whether real or simulated whose protagonist “seems to be a minor” except in cases where they are proven to have been eighteen years or older at the time of depiction. It also explains that “accessing a sexually explicit website containing content that appears to be a minor may be grounds for arrest and trial.”

Cyberactivism

Together with the Citizen Safety Act, the new Penal Code will also criminalize online activism and organizing imposing sentences between three months to one year to those who “emit slogans or messages”, “incite any offense of disorderly conduct,” incuding “disturbing the public peace.”

Distribution or public dissemination through any medium, of messages or slogans that incite the commission of any offense of disorderly conduct under Article 557 of the Penal Code, or serve to reinforce the decision to carry them out shall be punished with a fine of three to twelve months or imprisonment from three months to a year.

Anti-Terrorism Law

After the Charlie Hebdo attacks in France, Partido Popular and PSOE reached an agreement to amend the criminal code on terrorism which was also approved yesterday in Congress. The law again contains some vague language which leaves room for interpretation.

The new law uses a broad definition of “terrorism”: Among other things, cybercrime is now considered a terrorist act if the goal is to disrupt and/or disturb the public peace or cause a state of terror. For example, an attack on a Ministry website will now be a terrorist attack.

Viewing web pages with content targeted for or deemed as “suitable for terrorists” in a habitual manner can carry a penalty of two to five years in prison, but the law does not specify what is “habitual” or which websites are being targeted.

By expanding the definition of terrorism, it also expands what can be considered “glorifying terrorism” which can include for example tweeting certain content.

Glorification and public justification of crimes under Articles 572-577 or those who participated in its execution or performance of acts involving disrepute, contempt or humiliation of victims of terrorist offenses or their families, shall be punished with imprisonment of one to three years and a fine of twelve to eighteen months.

Paying for technological services could now be considered collaborating with terrorists.

Shall be punished with imprisonment from five to ten years and fined eighteen to twenty four months which takes place, soliciting or facilitating any act of collaboration with the activities or purposes of an organization, group or terrorist element, or commit any of the offenses covered by this chapter. In particular acts of collaboration of information or surveillance of individuals, […] the provision of technology services, and any other equivalent form of cooperation or assistance to the activities of organizations or terrorist groups, groups or individuals for the preceding paragraph.

Blocking content: The judge may order any service provider (search engines, etc.) to remove links to illegal content related to terrorism.

If the facts were committed through services or content accessible through the Internet or electronic communications services, the judge or court may order the removal of content or illicit services. Alternatively, you can order the service providers to withdraw illegal content, the search engines to abolish links pointing to them and providers of electronic communications services to prevent access to illegal content or services provided if they fulfill the following assumptions: a) When the measure is proportionate to the gravity of the facts and relevant information and necessary to prevent its spread. b) When it exclusively or predominantly diffuses the contents to which are referred to in the previous paragraphs.

Essentially, Spanish citizens should throw their computers out the windows, smash their hard drives to bits and never log on to the internet ever again. Forget about public organizing and any press freedoms that previously existed will be sharply curtailed once the new trifecta of insanely repressive laws goes into effect this coming July.

Sources:
xataka
eldiario.es

ALSO READ:

Spain: More than 6,600 cases of torture or ill-treatment by police since 2004

March 28, 2015 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »