U.S. uses veto, again, to block a draft cease fire in Gaza resolution

U.S. uses veto, again, to block a draft cease fire in Gaza resolution

    Wednesday, November 20, 2024   No comments

For the  4th time since the start of the war on Gaza, the United States vetoed a UN Security Council resolution calling for a ceasefire in Israel’s war on the Gaza Strip.

The draft resolution, which was supported by 14 countries and opposed by only the United States, called for “an immediate, unconditional and lasting ceasefire to be respected by all parties” and “the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages.”

The draft resolution stressed the need for the parties to co
mply with their obligations under international law regarding the persons they are holding captive and to enable the civilian population in the Gaza Strip to immediately obtain basic services and humanitarian assistance essential to their survival.

The draft resolution at the same time rejected any action that would lead to the starvation of Palestinians, and called for the facilitation of full, rapid, safe and unhindered humanitarian access to the Gaza Strip and all its areas to reach all Palestinian civilians in need, including civilians in the besieged northern Gaza Strip who are in dire need of immediate humanitarian relief, under the coordination of the United Nations.

The draft resolution called on all parties to fully comply with international law, including international humanitarian law, in particular its provisions relating to the protection of civilians, including in particular women, children and persons hors de combat, as well as its provisions relating to the protection of civilian objects.

The United States alone voted against the resolution, using its veto as a permanent member of the council to prevent its passage as it did many times before.

Media review, CNN commentator: "I hope your beeper doesn’t go off"

Media review, CNN commentator: "I hope your beeper doesn’t go off"

    Tuesday, October 29, 2024   No comments

Mainstream media guests include those who normalize acts of state terrorism, when the state of Israel turned communication devices into indiscriminate bombs. 

CNN describes the exchange that took place in its own studios with this introduction:

"CNN says a right-wing commentator will not be welcomed back on air after he made a racist remark on “CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip.”

On Monday’s prime time show, after Muslim journalist Mehdi Hasan stated that he supports Palestinians, conservative commentator Ryan Girdusky responded, “I hope your beeper doesn’t go off.” The comment referenced the thousands of pager explosions in Lebanon targeting Hezbollah militants. CNN has learned the attacks were carried out by Israel." - CNN

Nika Soon-Shiong said LA Times endorsement was blocked over Gaza war support

Nika Soon-Shiong said LA Times endorsement was blocked over Gaza war support

    Sunday, October 27, 2024   No comments

CNN and other media outlets reported that "the daughter of Los Angeles Times owner Patrick Soon-Shiong suggested on Saturday that herfather’s decision to block the newspaper’s endorsement of Vice President Kamala Harris was made over Harris’ support for Israel’s war in Gaza.

Nika Soon-Shiong, a 31-year-old activist who has no official role at the newspaper but has previously been accused of meddling in its coverage, told The New York Times that she and her father made the decision not to endorse Harris. Nika Soon-Shiong reportedly said:

“Our family made the joint decision not to endorse a Presidential candidate. This was the first and only time I have been involved in the process... As a citizen of a country openly financing genocide, and as a family that experienced South African Apartheid, the endorsement was an opportunity to repudiate justifications for the widespread targeting of journalists and ongoing war on children.”

Before Biden dropped out, it was argued that Gaza Genocide will be for Biden what Covid-19 was for Trump. Harris, not making a clear shift in Biden's policies and approach made her inherit his legacy and that will likely sink her bid for the presidency. Young Americans, especially, are not willing to look past the atrocities in Gaza and now Lebanon happening under Biden's watch and by his support.

Prestigious academic institutions' declining prestige

Prestigious academic institutions' declining prestige

    Friday, October 11, 2024   No comments

Princeton Praised a Professor for Winning a MacArthur; and at the same time, Princeton launches a Probe Into Her stance on Palestine.

As congratulations poured in for the recipients of this year’s MacArthur Award, Dr. Ruha Benjamin, a professor of African American studies at Princeton University, should have been celebrating a career-defining achievement. But the full story was a bit more complicated. Around the same time that she had been awarded one of the most prestigious prizes in intellectual circles, Dr. Benjamin was being chastised for pro-Palestine activism by her university.  

                                                                    Read full article...

“Iran’s Attack on Israel Failed”

“Iran’s Attack on Israel Failed”

    Wednesday, October 02, 2024   No comments

Western media and Western government reactions to Iran’s retaliatory attack on Israel raises serious concerns. Before sharing some of these reactions, some context, then some questions that would drive world community perception of governments' reactions to these developments.

On October 1, Iran struck several military and security sites in Israel in response to Israel’s assassination of Haniyeh, Nasrollah, and Iranian officials. Iran described the attack as “legal, rational and legitimate”.

Israeli leaders said Iran's strike "failed" but also siad that Israel reserves the right to retaliate. Some Western governments said Iran’s attack failed because their armies participated in intercepting the rockets. They also “strongly condemned” the attack by Iran. 

These positions might be convenient at the moment. However, long term, the West might come to regret their reactions and non-reactions to the events of the last weeks and months because their positions expose their disdain to the life and dignity of other peoples, compared to how they avenge the deaths of their own. These are critical moments that require principled response. Few facts will illustrate the problem the West faces.

1. If Iran’s attack failed, why are Western governments condemning it in the strongest terms possible? And did it fail because it did not kill Israeli civilians? Because many of the rockets landed, and they seem to have landed in specific locations, which means if they were aimed at civilian centers they would have landed in civilian centers. Is the West's measure of failure and success determined by the number of civilians killed?

2. Whenever Israel attacks another country and such attacks result in countless deaths of civilians including children and women, the West does not condemn such attacks; instead reaffirms Israel’s right for self-defense. If they believe in a principle of self-defense, Western governments need to answer the questions: Do other peoples and other countries have the right to such self-defense, too?

3. When Israel attacks in self-defense, civilians, including children and women, as acknowledged by France’s president are killed. In fact, in retaliation for the Oct. 7 attack, Israel killed 13 Palestinian children for 1 Israeli death for a total of 16,000 Palestinian chidlren and counting; or 33 Palestinians for 1 Israeli, for a total of 41,000 Gazans and counting. Is this an acceptable formular for self-defense killings?

Answers to these questions are not an exercise in morality speak; answers to these questions can form a practical, sound foundation for ending the cycles of violence.

  

New Zealand journalist Shaneel Lal on Western Media and Genocide

New Zealand journalist Shaneel Lal on Western Media and Genocide

    Friday, September 27, 2024   No comments

New Zealand journalist Shaneel Lal delivers a powerful speech in support of Gaza and Palestinian journalists killed by the Israeli occupation during his acceptance speech for the Journalist of the Year Award at the One Young World Summit in Montréal, Canada.

“It’s our moral obligation to give voice to those who have been oppressed and silenced by those in power” 

The Problem is not Netanyahu, it is Israel's next generation of leaders like Bezalel Smotrich

The Problem is not Netanyahu, it is Israel's next generation of leaders like Bezalel Smotrich

    Monday, September 09, 2024   No comments

Hundreds of thousands protest weekly in Israel these days, wanting to bring down Netanyahu and his government, accusing the former of being an obstacle to making a deal that would end the war in Gaza, and saying that he is doing so for purely personal reasons--fear of being charged and convicted with crimes. If that is true, that would make him less dangerous to the region than other members of his government who are against any deals, not for personal reasons, but for ideological and religious reasons. And the future of Israel will be in the hands of people like Bezalel Smotrich, who hold the belief that Israel will be secure only when Palestinians are erased.

“I believe that the village of Hawara should be wiped out, and I believe that the State of Israel should do it, and not, God forbid, private individuals.” These words escaped the lips of Bezalel Smotrich, Minister of Finance and Minister of Civil Affairs in the Ministry of Defense in Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, during a conference organized in Tel Aviv in March 2023 by the Israeli economic newspaper The Marker. 

The minister, who heads the “Religious Zionism” party and is known to be a licensed lawyer and carefully calculates his words, did not expect, in the context of his comment on the settlers’ barbaric campaign against homes and property in the village of Hawara, south of Nablus, (in revenge for the killing of settlers by Palestinians), that this statement would bring upon him the wrath of the US State Department, whose officials called for a boycott of him. The US ambassador to Tel Aviv, Tom Nides, went on to call Smotrich “stupid,” prompting the latter to try to minimize the damage during a televised news program, saying, “Whoever can attribute to me the intention of wiping out the village, that is up to their obsessive mind. The intention is to be more proactive and aggressive in the war against terrorism, because people are being killed here… Perhaps this was said during a fit of emotion… I stumbled over my tongue.” 

But "the cat's out of the bag", and Smotrich’s words and actions, past and present, have come under scrutiny, given that he has been the third pillar of the ruling coalition in Israel since December 2022, after Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Galant, and the guardian of settlement expansion in the occupied West Bank, in its new form.

Smotrich is not an outlier who represents no one in Israel, he has been elected consistently for years. Smotrich entered the Israeli political arena after being elected to the Knesset in March 2015, and was re-elected for five subsequent terms. With the formation of Netanyahu’s sixth government at the end of 2022, Smotrich was given the Finance Minister portfolio, which was previously held by Avigdor Lieberman, controlling the budgets of ministries and state institutions, including the army, in addition to controlling the movement of funds received by the Palestinian Authority under the 1994 Paris Agreement, especially the tax funds that must be handed over to the Authority, known as the clearance revenue, which is considered the backbone of public revenues in Palestine. In addition to this important and sensitive portfolio, another portfolio was added, the Ministry of Civil Affairs within the Ministry of Defense. In addition to the two portfolios, the leader of the Religious Zionism Party, Orit Struck, was appointed Minister of Settlement.

Smotrich first ran for the 18th Knesset in 2009, coming in ninth place on the National Union list. According to the Knesset Elections Law, he was exempted from serving in the IDF for three months, after which he returned to complete his service. At first, Smotrich opposed entering politics, but he did so on the instructions of his elders - headed by Rabbi Haim Druckman - who decided that this was a necessary step.

On June 23, 2019, he was appointed Minister of Transportation and a member of the Political-Security Cabinet in the transitional government.

Ahead of the 24th Knesset elections, he split from the Yamina list, according to him, against the backdrop of Naftali Bennett's willingness to enter the government in cooperation with left-wing parties. Smotrich ran as head of the "Religious Zionism" list in the technical bloc of the National Union parties: "Takuma", "Otzma Yehudit" and "Noam". The list won 6 seats in the elections, 4 of which went to Smotrich's party.

Where did this settler, haunted by the doctrine of "religious Zionism", come from?

His biography published on social media platforms says that he was born in 1980 in the settlement of "Haspin", built on the ruins of the village of "Khasfin" in the southern occupied Syrian Golan, to a Ukrainian family of religious nationalist zealots. In the settlement of "Beit El" north of Ramallah, he grew up in schools that combine the Jewish religion and Zionist thought.

Smotrich is the son of a settlement rabbi. He was born in one settlement, raised in another, married and lived in a third, from the Golan Heights to Hebron in Kiryat Arba, and then to Kedumim near Nablus. When he was 28, Smotrich volunteered in the Israeli army, and served for a year and a half in the central square in the operations department of the General Staff, a special period of service for religious people.

A leader for the future who is putting roots settlements he is determined to expand

Although he holds a bachelor’s degree in law and is licensed to practice law, Smotrich does not believe in international law, peace agreements with neighboring countries, or any Israeli laws that contradict the “Greater Israel” doctrine that aims to impose sovereignty over all of the Palestinian territories and parts of Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon.

The man currently lives with his settler wife and seven children in the Kedumim settlement, built on Nablus land in the northern West Bank, after he seized private Palestinian land and built his home on it without a permit even from the occupation authorities.

The Israeli investigative website "Shomrim" revealed some features of the doctrine of "religious Zionism" and its impact on Smotrich's statements and speeches, in a report published by the Arabic version of the "Madar" website on September 4, 2023.

The report says: Regarding the conflict with the Palestinians, Smotrich often repeats phrases: There is no such thing as "two states for two peoples" and "The land of Israel is ours, and what is ours cannot be stolen," and another refrain that clearly reflects his quest for a single state or the implementation of a transfer. In 2015, he said in a speech he gave before the Knesset General Assembly: "There is only one state here, a Jewish state, and there will never be a Palestinian state alongside it. Whoever wants to live with us is welcome, but whoever does not want to either leave or we will see him in the crosshairs" (rifle aim). A year later, Smotrich wrote on Twitter (then X now): “All that remains now is to move from words to deeds: turn off the lights in the Palestinian Authority, impose sovereignty, and do everything that any self-respecting independent state would do.” As for the idea of ​​voluntary transfer, Smotrich calls it “encouraging immigration,” explaining that “those who do not want or cannot put aside their national aspirations will receive assistance from us to immigrate to an Arab country or to any other destination in the world.” This is not immigration on rickety boats, but rather the modern phenomenon of immigration on a plane to an organized future. 

Smotrich: My life’s mission is to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state

Smotrich has declared just this week that his life mission is to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state. Smotrich, leader of the Religious Zionism party, made these remarks via social media, further emphasizing his commitment to expanding Israeli control over the occupied West Bank.

Smotrich stated, “My life’s mission is to build the Land of Israel and thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state that would endanger the State of Israel.” He framed this goal as not merely political but “national and existential,” highlighting the deep ideological commitment that drives his agenda.

Smotrich also highlighted his policies to entrench Israeli control in the occupied West Bank. “This is why, in addition to my role as Finance Minister, I took on the responsibility for civilian affairs in Judea and Samaria (the Israeli biblical name for the West Bank),” he added, reinforcing his intent to expand and support illegal settlements.

Smotrich’s rhetoric, which explicitly rejects Palestinian statehood, further highlights the ongoing challenges Palestinians face under Israeli occupation. His pledge to protect the “half a million settlers on the frontline, under fire,” is seen as a direct message to Palestinians threatening of subjecting them to ethnic cleansing.

Recently, Israeli settlers in the West Bank have escalated their violent attacks on native Palestinians, emboldened by Israeli leaders like Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir.

Senior Israeli military officials have even accused Smotrich and Ben Gvir of fueling unrest and “provoking a regional war.” According to reports in Israeli media, their extreme policies are seen as the “direct cause” of what is described as an increase in Palestinian resistance across the West Bank.

Smotrich also said that while the Israeli political leadership aims to control the aid entering Gaza, the Israeli military refuses to take responsibility for managing it.

The minister’s insistence on Israeli control over aid comes at a time when the besieged Gaza Strip is suffering from an Israeli-made famine and humanitarian crisis.

 Smotrich's Messianic "Revolution"

“A few weeks ago, I met with one of the settler leaders in the West Bank, a Likudman. I asked him what grade he would give Smotrich and Ben-Gvir. The man said, ‘I’m disappointed with Ben-Gvir. He talks more than he does. I’m very satisfied with Smotrich,’” Yedioth Ahronoth political analyst Nahum Barnea wrote in his report on the radical changes that Finance Minister and Defense Minister Smotrich have brought about in the West Bank. Although the report did not provide anything new in this regard, it explained, in some detail, how the extremist minister, founder of the Regavim movement, was able to bring about a qualitative shift in the settlement project in the West Bank towards actually annexing the latter to Israel, which enabled him to obtain the “mark” he deserved. 

According to Israeli law, the army is the supreme authority or sovereign in the West Bank, “but in reality, Israel’s sovereignty in Judea and Samaria was handed over to a closed, extremist political sect, which obeys the command of one person and advances according to one messianic plan,” according to Barnea, who adds that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “supports that sect or does not obstruct it. What it currently lacks is completed by the government revolution within the Green Line, with weak opposition from the army.” 

The writer explains that Smotrich took control of the West Bank using a pincer tactic, the first jaw of which is represented by his position as Minister of Finance, and the second by his powers derived from his position as Minister of Defense, adding that “the goal he set in the decisive plan he published in 2017 has not changed: to cause the collapse of the Palestinian Authority, prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state, and present the seven million Arabs living between the Jordan River and the sea with one of these options: death in battle, emigrate abroad, or remain second-class citizens forever.” In this context, Smotrich froze or delayed the transfer of clearance revenues that Israel collects on behalf of the Palestinian Authority from customs and taxes, in order to pay the salaries of its employees. 

Not only that, but he also activated “Article B of the Terror Victims Compensation Law,” which was approved last June at the behest of Justice Minister Yariv Levin and the chairman of the Constitution and Law Committee, Simcha Rothman. It stipulates that “any person injured in a terrorist act who sustains a permanent disability is entitled to compensation of up to five million shekels,” which is the money that Israel deducts from the clearance revenues, and is equivalent to the allocations that the Palestinian Authority pays to the families of Palestinian martyrs and prisoners. 

According to the new law, Israel can deduct it twice. Also, since October 7, the issuance of work permits within the Green Line has been suspended; Barnea points out here that “the Shin Bet, which feared the consequences of the economic crisis and its impact on the escalation of resistance operations, prepared a plan for the supervised entry of a portion of the workers into permanent workplaces,” while “the army supported this plan, but Smotrich and his colleagues exerted pressure that led to its rejection, and the Palestinian population was left with no choice but to rely on foreign aid, including money sent by Iran to the Hamas and Islamic Jihad movements.”

The second arm of the “Smotrich empire” is Hillel Rot from the Yitzhar settlement, who, after being appointed deputy head of the Civil Administration for Civil Affairs by Smotrich, became the de facto governor of the West Bank. In this context, Barnea quotes Professor Dan Turner, a settler in the Kfar Adumim settlement on the Jerusalem-Jericho road, as saying that “all the powers of the head of the Civil Administration were given to Rot, who is subordinate to the Settlement Administration, a political body in Smotrich’s ministry in the Ministry of Defense.” 

Among these powers is the appointment of department heads in the Civil Administration; Rot “appoints activists in the Religious Zionism Party to it, and thus an engineer from the Revava settlement was recently appointed director of the planning office in the Civil Administration, which is the highest authority in the field of planning and construction (in the West Bank).” The “Smotrich revolution” also affected the “legal advisor for Judea and Samaria,” who is subordinate to the military prosecution; He was fired and his department was closed, while “Smotrich appointed more than 20 lawyers whose mission is to quickly change the regulations to allow the development of the area for Jews only,” according to Turner, who explains that “everything is managed by civilian officials, politicians. Civilizing services is one of Smotrich’s means of freeing himself from the control of the army and implementing de facto annexation.” 

He explains that “over the past year and a half, there has been no planning for the 300,000 Palestinians living in Area C, and they have not been granted a single building permit, while demolitions, including the demolition of water wells and schools, have become routine.” In contrast, the declaration of lands as “state land” has quadrupled, as have building permits, and the establishment of unauthorized outposts has accelerated. According to Turner, “There are more than 100 small outposts and farms on Palestinian pastures. 

Unauthorized construction by Jews is not enforced, with Smotrich’s encouragement.” For its part, the “Judea and Samaria Police are acting in accordance with the policy of (National Security Minister Itamar) Ben-Gvir; they refrain from stopping Jewish violence and terrorism. If a settler is arrested, he is immediately released.” In fact, all of the above “will not help us in the court hearings against us in The Hague,” according to Turner, which intersects with what Barnea reported from Israeli security officials, who expressed their fear of “the impact of Kahanist measures (terrorism derived from the doctrine of Rav Meir Kahane, founder of the terrorist Kach movement) in the West Bank on the escalation of terrorism (resistance operations), and of a ruling that may be issued by the two international courts in The Hague.” 

According to Barnea, what is happening in the West Bank “seems to be a convenient pretext for issuing arrest warrants for government ministers, including its prime minister,” and “the American administration is concerned about the changes taking place in the West Bank, no less than it is concerned about the stagnation in Gaza. What happens in the West Bank does not stay in the West Bank.” Yesterday, Smotrich renewed his defense of what he is doing in the West Bank in a post on X, saying that “my life’s mission is to build the Land of Israel and thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state that would endanger the State of Israel. 

This is not political, but rather national and existential. That is why I have taken upon myself, in addition to my position as Minister of Finance, responsibility for civil affairs in Judea and Samaria.” He added, “(I) will continue to work with all my might so that the half a million settlers living on the front lines and under fire enjoy the rights of every citizen of Israel, and to establish facts that prevent the establishment of a Palestinian terrorist state, which will be (…) an Iranian forward base for the next massacre in Kfar Saba, Raanana and the entire center of the country.”

...

  These are not the views of an outlier, Israel's leaders are elected, and Bezalel Smotrich was not elected once or twice, he was elected many times and he, like leaders of other Zionist parties, represent a majority of the Israeli society, which means it represents the popular view of Israel. When Western governments, and Arab leaders address the place of Hamas and other religious groups in Palestinian societies, they often say, Hamas does not represent the Palestinians. The problem for Western leaders, is, what do you say about the Israeli Hamas-like, based on Western reasoning, like the groups that elect Bezalel Smotrich, who represent the majority of society, and are calling for genocide, forced population transfer, and ethnic cleansing? Does their being elected make them less subject to the principles of justice upon which the Palestinian claim to statehood is based?

  

Media review, compiled by Ali Hafez, B. Hamoud et al.

How serious is the killing of US citizen outside US? It depends on who does the killing

How serious is the killing of US citizen outside US? It depends on who does the killing

    Friday, September 06, 2024   No comments

When US citizens are killed by Muslims, US administrations exact bloody revenge swiftly and decisively, and the media always finds the way to explicitly name the persons who killed them and emphasize their being Muslim. But not when American citizens are killed by Israeli forces. The reaction to the recent killing of a US citizen by Israeli forces in West Bank is one example in a series of many including the killing of American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh and going back all the way to the gruesome killing of Rachel Corrie.

Here is how the media reported on the killing and how some Western officials, including UN officials reacted: generally, wanting the accused to investigate themselves.

US-Turkish activist Aysenur Ezgi Eygi, 26, was shot dead by Israel in the West Bank during settlement protest.

Social media users, including Scotland’s first minister, Hamza Yousaf, have criticized the BBC for not including the perpetrators of Eygi’s death in their headline.

The pattern of shielding the killer is clear; NPR reported on Israeli troops shooting of American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh in West Bank echo's BBC's:

Eygi was participating in a protest against illegal Israeli settlement expansion in the town of Beita, south of Nablus, the Palestinian Wafa agency reported.

An activist who was with Eygi at the time told Middle East Eye that she and other volunteers from the International Solidarity Movement had been attending the weekly demonstration at Beita.

"When she was shot, she was standing there doing absolutely nothing with one other woman - it was a deliberate shot because they shot from a very, very, very far distance," said the activist, who did not want to be identified.

US officials' reaction, mostly muted

The only voice in the US to demand serious action to address Israel's killing of a US citizen was US Senator Chris Van Hollen.

On Friday Van Hollen urged Biden administration to do more to hold Israel accountable for killing of American citizens.

"The Netanyahu Government - including racist extremist like Smotrich and Ben-Gvir - has fueled settler violence in the West Bank at the same time that it has announced new illegal settlements.

"The United States cannot turn a blind eye to these actions – including the killing of American citizens," Democrat senator said in a statement.

His remarks came after Turkish-American activist Aysenur Ezgi Eygi was shot dead by Israeli forces on Friday during a protest against illegal Israeli settlements in the town of Beita in the Nablus district of the occupied West Bank.

Van Hollen said the US has not received "satisfactory responses" from the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Government about the two other Americans killed in the West Bank since Oct. 7, adding the Biden administration has "not been doing enough" to pursue justice and accountability on their behalf.

"The Biden Administration must do more to hold the Netanyahu Government accountable and use American influence to demand the prosecution of those responsible for harm against American citizens.

"If the Netanyahu Government will not pursue justice for Americans, the U.S. Department of Justice must," he added.

When UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric was asked about the killing of American citizen Aysenur Ezgi Eygi by Israeli soldiers in the occupied West Bank, he replied, "We would want to see a full investigation of the circumstances, and that people should be held accountable. And again, civilians must be protected at all times."

A long history of bias

In the case of Corrie, even after 21 years, US media, including NPR, continue to deny her justice, using headlines that says, "the death" instead of the killing, and living the name of the actor who did the killing out.

...

Update:

On September 9, US President Joe Biden appeared to embrace Israel's explanation, which claimed that IDF killing of American activist in West Bank was accidental. 

Biden described the killing of a 26-year-old American citizen in the Israeli-occupied West Bank last week as an apparent accident, echoing the Israel government's description.

Israel has claimed that Aysenur Ezgi Eygi was "hit indirectly and unintentionally by IDF fire" on Friday. 

"We're finding more detail," Biden told reporters on the South Lawn of the White House Tuesday. "Apparently, it was an accident. It ricocheted off the ground and it – (she) got hit by accident, but we're working that out now."

The colonial pillaging and plunder continues

The colonial pillaging and plunder continues

    Friday, August 30, 2024   No comments

In 2022, Josep Borell, the European Union’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, triggered a controversy by saying that Europe was a garden of prosperity and “most of the rest of the world” was a jungle. 

Some accused him of tone-deafness and racism. He defended his statement saying that his "reference to 'jungle' has no racist, cultural or geographical connotation." But he never explained how the "jungle" has become, in his mind, a jungle and how the garden of prosperity has become a garden of prosperity and how has it been kept a garden of prosperity. That task was left to the French president who, in a different context, identified the systems by which the Western world accumulated wealth and siphoned it from the rest of the world causing not only a desert of capital in the Global South, but also created a brain drain that continues to pillage and plunder the human resources of the rest of the world, turning them into the "jungle" they describe. 

The plunder and pillaging continue without direct war, allowing the pillagers to plunder and claim the moral high ground at the same time, which, the moral posturing that is, too, can be used to suppress resisters and attract willing collaborators.

Here is France's president explaining how the Russian citizen, who is now worth $15 billion, became a French citizen, a member of the garden of prosperity:

"It's a decision we made in 2018, which I fully stand by," Macron said Thursday. He added that it was "part of a strategy to allow women and men when they are artists, sportsmen, entrepreneurs, when they make the effort to learn the language, when they create wealth, when they ask for it, to grant them French citizenship. I did it for Mr Durov, who took the trouble to learn French, just as I did it for Spiegel. I think it's good for our country," he declared as reported Politico.

... excerpted from The colonial pillaging and plunder continues.

"Does [a non-Western government] have the right to defend itself?"

"Does [a non-Western government] have the right to defend itself?"

    Tuesday, August 06, 2024   No comments

 

Why is so difficult for Western governments to answer the question, "Does [a non-Western government] have the right to defend itself?"

 

The Racist History of Psychology

The Racist History of Psychology

    Thursday, July 18, 2024   No comments

“The general wards were abysmal, and there were only five doctors, four of them foreigners, who were not licensed to practice in the United States, and did not have credentials as psychiatrists in their home country. The fifth psychiatrist was in charge, and he was clearly unfamiliar with modern psychiatry, and looked like he was running a plantation in some southern state.” This was part of the report written by Inspector Marilyn Rose, when she participated in a 1967 committee to inspect psychiatric hospital facilities, especially in Alabama and Mississippi, where black people with mental health problems, or what would now be known as psychopaths, were cared for.

Yes, they were treated separately, in institutions that did not allow them to mix with the white population, within the context of racial segregation and the persecution of blacks that the United States of America has known since its founding, until recently, and the face of psychiatry was ugly in that matter, and at that time.

In the history of the establishment of psychiatry, many psychological experiments and studies have sought to distort and oppress black people. In fact, many pioneers of psychology who have made significant contributions to the field of psychology have been involved in supporting this racism and strengthening its control over their scientific and research work.

From the facilities of psychiatric hospitals in the states of Alabama and Mississippi, we move to the College of Education at Stanford University, specifically in the early twentieth century, where Lewis Madison Terman, one of the most prominent American psychologists, worked. He later became famous as a pioneer of educational psychology, and among his achievements was the development of a special test to measure a person's intelligence level, called the "Stanford-Binet Intelligence Test".

Terman was one of the prominent scientists who supported the idea of ​​"improving" the race, and he was a member of a well-known organization at that time called "Human Improvement", in addition to holding the position of President of the "American Psychological Association".

In his work on the IQ test, Terman made several statements that were later deemed extremely racist against people of color, including saying that black people were "innately dull" and that "the children of these groups [of color] should be separated into special classes and given concrete and practical instruction...they cannot handle abstract matters." Terman also said that "from the eugenics point of view, 'blacks' pose a serious problem because of their unusually prolific breeding."

Black people, "They're not supposed to get sick"

This racist school of psychology believed that black people were immune to mental illness and would not fall into the clutches of depression or other neurotic symptoms, all because of their special psychological and mental makeup, or in Terman's words because of their "innate dullness," as he claimed.

Dr. Uchenna Umeh, a former doctor in San Antonio, Texas, and a woman of Nigerian origin living in the United States, decided to leave her job in 2018 to focus on public lectures, with the aim of spreading and raising awareness about mental disorders among people of African descent in the United States.

Dr. Oceana explains that for many years, many black people believed that they were supposed to be free from mental health problems, based on the bizarre idea of ​​John Galt, a physician and medical director of the Williamsburg, Virginia, Asylum, published in 1848, that black people had a natural immunity to mental illness.

Galt based his earlier view on the assumption that Africans were enslaved, that slaves owned nothing, had no role in free enterprise, and did not participate in civic affairs or engage in political activities such as voting or holding office. Based on this assumption, the risk of developing mental health problems would be higher among whites who are exposed on a daily basis to the effects of political activities, the competition for ambition and advancement within entrepreneurial and commercial communities, and the resulting stresses that accompany gains or crises that follow losses.

Samuel Cartwright was one of those doctors who argued that slavery was the “natural state” of African Americans, adding that they benefited from hard labor and were unable to care for themselves outside of this system. Cartwright also claimed that people of color displayed a “childish” simplicity of feeling and a lack of complex emotional processes, which he saw as characteristic of their entire race.

Based on Cartwright’s view that slavery was the “natural” state of black people, deviation from this “natural” state was a mental disorder. This is exactly what Cartwright explained in 1851, when he published a report in which he invented two “psychic” disorders, the symptoms of which included the tendency of “slaves” to escape or resist hard labor, and these disorders were classified as “mental diseases,” and he called them “draeptomania” and “dysaesthesia aethiopica.”

Hospital administrators used Cartwright’s ideas to justify their medical opinions that there were no real psychiatric treatments for African American patients, that they did not feel the same way as whites, or that they were not suitable for things like psychoanalysis or group therapy. This is why black patients were segregated into separate, substandard hospital facilities, and were put to work in the hospital laundry, kitchen, and fields.

“My family, my friends, my acquaintances, my patients, their parents, their grandparents, we are all black, so we are supposed to never have to struggle with mental health issues,” says Nigerian-American physician Uchenna Umeh. “Unfortunately, we ourselves have bought into this narrative [of Galt and others like him], that mental health issues do not exist in our race, and we have unconsciously spread this narrative to our detriment.”

During her work, Dr. Uchenna noticed a significant increase in depression and suicidal ideation among her patients. “Suicide rates among African American children ages 5 to 11 have increased steadily since the 1980s and are now twice as high as those of their Caucasian peers,” she says. “Black men accounted for 80 percent of African American suicide attempts in 2015. And those numbers are rising.”

In order to understand the practice of racism and its presence in psychiatry historically and sequentially, let us tell you the roots of the matter from the beginning. Specifically, between 1861 and 1865, the period in which the "Civil War" took place between the northern and southern states of America, and during which the American field of "psychology" was officially institutionalized, where programs, departments, academic degrees, societies and schools specialized in the study of psychology were established and created.

This war is considered one of the worst bloody events that the American Federal Union has been exposed to, and one of its main causes was the "slavery/servitude" system. At a time when the northern states wanted to restrict the scope of slavery and put in place laws that would achieve this, the southern states were expanding slavery, and even relying primarily in their economic system based entirely on agricultural slave labor.

The Civil War freed nearly four million slaves across the South, but this did not lead to more enlightened medical attitudes toward the treatment of African Americans. Quite the opposite, as psychiatry continued its racist sectarianism.

In 1895, Dr. Powell, the superintendent of the Georgia State Asylum, as it was called, noted an alarming increase in mental health problems among blacks in his state. Powell attributed this increase to the three decades of freedom that had preceded the emancipation of slaves, as a large segment of them had not been able to adjust to the openness and consequences of the Civil War. Powell seemed to see slavery and freedom as biologically innate and inevitable.

Powell argued that when former slaves gained their freedom, they were unable to control their desires and emotions, which in turn led to abuses that led to higher rates of mental health diagnoses.

Of course, Powell did not see the truth, which was right in front of him, but his racism prevented him from going to the root of the problem, as the reason for the increase in mental health problems among blacks goes back to a long history of living under extremely poor social and economic conditions, including poverty, racial discrimination, and the specter of violence that may have reached the point of execution, but he chose the easiest way; he said that black people obtaining freedom is the root of their mental and psychological problems.

Colonial Psychology

When the American Psychological Association was founded in 1892, it was headed by Granville Stanley Hall and had 31 white male members elected to its membership. At that time, formal psychology was primarily white-led and heavily relied on the then-popular theory of evolution. The Western psychological field gave its full support to the idea of ​​"white" male superiority, as a result of its findings, and focused its entire attention on demonstrating individual differences among different racial groups.

In 1904, G. Stanley Hall, the founding president of the American Psychological Association, published his theory of "adolescence." In it, he described the First Nations, the indigenous peoples of the Americas before the time of Christopher Columbus, as living in a phase of "human childhood," and that their adults were more like the adolescents of white children or adolescents.

Hall developed colonial "civilization programs" specifically designed to meet what he saw as the needs of the First Nations. These programs provided the moral framework for colonialism, and the result was the cultural genocide of different peoples, with the glamorous goal: we are doing this in order to civilize them and subordinate them to the Western model, under the rule of the white man.

But after World War I, a reverse movement occurred, as some of the sons of poor peoples rushed to the United States and other rich countries of the North, and unprecedented numbers of immigrants arrived, accompanied by a surge in anti-immigration sentiment, and here the theory of "eugenics" emerged, using the principles of genetics. Here, African Americans, who were said to suffer from mental "deficiencies", faced a new and more serious threat to their safety.

The science of "eugenics" was based on two parallel principles: encouraging births among people with a "good" genetic stock, and sterilizing those who were not fit to reproduce, including individuals suffering from mental illness, as well as the poor and those accused of sexual abuse. The focus was on sterilizing African Americans. In California alone in the 1930s, African Americans, who represented 1% of the population, accounted for 4% of the victims of legal sterilization.

Many pioneers in psychology advocated a social agenda that sought to limit the number of children born to people classified as “less fit,” and people of color classified as “less fit” were considered inferior in Western society in terms of knowledge and common law.

Sir Francis Galton, one of the early leaders of psychology, was the first to coin the term "eugenics". Galton is considered one of the icons of "race science", a branch of science that studies the origins and characteristics of different peoples. The "eugenics theory" played a major role in supporting the idea of ​​racial distinctions in their personal and psychological abilities.

His book "Hereditary Genius", published in 1869, was considered the first scientific attempt to study "genius and greatness", and was seen as one of the early literature that contributed to the study of individual differences and psychological measurements in European and American psychology. He concluded that the average intellectual level of the "Negro race" is two degrees lower than that of the white man.

Francis’s book was a major reference and was widely used by the first generation of psychologists who founded the American Psychological Association, the first recognized psychology journals, and the most influential research programs. Many prominent academics were implicated in popularizing notions of white superiority not only in intelligence, but also in moral, cultural, and psychological terms.

In the journal Psychological Review, just one year after the first issue of the American Psychological Review, a study was published showing that samples of so-called First Nations and blacks sometimes had “faster” reaction times than whites, which they interpreted as indicating a greater degree of haste and impulsiveness in their responses, due to their propensity for violence. The study’s authors argued that the quick response was due to “primitiveness,” and that the more developed intelligence of the white participants led to deeper thinking and slower responses.

Many psychologists continued to support the idea of ​​white superiority in both public and academic outlets. For example, in 1922, psychologist James Rowland Angell, president of Yale University, gave a series of lectures describing the hierarchy of races, espousing white supremacy, and discussing the low intelligence of blacks.

In 1922, the Journal of Comparative Psychology published a study linking the degree of “white blood” in First Nations peoples to higher IQ scores. In 1933, more studies were published arguing that First Nations children were more dishonest than white children.

Perhaps the logical question here is: Was the research or results conducted at the time falsified in order to prove that whites were superior to their colored counterparts? The answer: Perhaps not, but the study itself and the results drawn from it were conducted through a mindset dominated by the idea of ​​white evolution and superiority, so that even if the research and studies came back with the opposite results that people of color were superior in some aspect, this result would be viewed and formulated within an interpretive framework from the position and reference of white superiority.

This is what happened in 1897, when a study conducted on black and white children concluded that colored children had stronger memories, and that they generally outperformed white children on a memory task.

Here, although the results of the study were positive for black people, they were formulated in a completely negative way, as the author attributed the strength of black children’s memories to the ability of their “primitive brains” to remember more than others, and described black children as deficient in thinking.

Racism controls psychiatric diagnosis

Psychiatrists’ preconceived biases against people of color have led to unscientific diagnoses that do not adhere to professional standards. A 2023 study found a significant disparity in the prevalence of schizophrenia spectrum disorders (seeing imaginary figures and hearing voices) between people of color in the United States and Canada and whites in those same countries. Black people are diagnosed with these disorders at higher rates than other groups.

The consequences of this scientifically inaccurate diagnosis are exacerbated by punitive societal effects throughout life, including increased stigma, reduced opportunities, poorer care, and increased likelihood of criminalization and arrest. Stereotypes associated with psychotic symptoms may put these patients at risk for police violence and premature death.

The unfortunate side of this is that, as new data show, the differences in diagnosis rates are unlikely to be genetic, but rather societal in origin. Overdiagnosis of schizophrenia spectrum disorders is largely due to racial biases among clinicians.

The study showed how misunderstandings of race confound attempts to diagnose and treat schizophrenia spectrum disorders in black individuals, in addition to implicit biases preventing black patients from receiving appropriate treatment from primarily white mental health providers, which the study described as a “lack of empathy” among doctors for their patients.

In the same context, Dr. Uchenna Umeh, in her article published on the “blackpast” website, questioned the validity of the diagnosis of children detained in psychiatric hospitals and mental health disorders, as she explained that asylum authorities often praised the abilities and skills of these children, which raises many questions about the validity of their mental illness diagnosis in the first place.

Here Uchenna says: “If these black people were truly ‘lost their minds’, how were they able to perform continuous, hard work that required special skills, while white patients were often too ‘weak’ mentally to work?!”

The National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) explains that there is a long history of discrimination and racism in mental health care. People with mental illness have always been discriminated against, denied full participation in society, labeled dangerous and criminal, and many were held in institutions that were more like prisons designed to punish than hospitals designed to treat.

This discrimination was bad for anyone with a mental illness or disorder, but it was especially bad for the most marginalized, including African American men, women, and children. Some centers in states like Alabama and Mississippi segregated patients on racial grounds, and even claimed that it was “medically” necessary to separate patients on racial grounds.

In the 1960s, a series of federal legislation and lawsuits attempted to end this discrimination. The Community Mental Health Centers Act (CMHA) was passed to improve the provision of treatment and care for people with mental illness, or what is now known as mental disorders. In 1964, the Civil Rights Act was passed, which included a provision that made it illegal for any facility or service receiving federal funds to discriminate on the basis of race.

At the time, some states still had segregated treatment policies, which put them at risk of losing funding and receiving no financial support to provide medical care. Instead of accepting these provisions and finding ways to end segregation, states including Alabama and Mississippi chose to fight the federal government in court. They claimed that they had the right to administer state services without federal interference, and that it was “medically” necessary to separate patients on the basis of race.

As with research, experiments, and statistics, doctors based their view of the need for “segregated” treatment on a long history of racist ideas in psychiatry. And Dr. John Galt, who made the preposterous claim that black people shouldn’t have mental health problems, was not the only one whose medical opinion was driven by racism. Since the early 19th century, some psychiatrists have argued that African Americans were biologically “inferior” to other people and races.

Here, Dr. Ochena explains the conditions of treatment for black people with mental health problems: “Most pre-Civil War mental health facilities in the South typically denied treatment to enslaved people.”

It seems clear that mental health experts believed that housing blacks and whites in the same facilities would negatively impact the recovery of whites. Housing conditions in Southern asylums for the few who accepted enslaved people were disastrous compared to white patients. Blacks were often housed outdoors near these institutions or in local jails. There were accounts of some black children being housed in asylum grounds.

"Apology"

Finally, after all this long history of injustice and oppression in mental health and psychiatric institutions for black people, the American Psychiatric Association in 2021 acknowledged and apologized for all of the above. In January, the 176-year-old association issued its first-ever apology for its racist past. It acknowledged what it called the profession's "horrific" past actions, committed its board of directors to identifying, understanding, and correcting past injustices against black people, and pledged to adopt new anti-racist practices aimed at ending this long history of discrimination.

However, some critics saw this apology as insufficient, and doubted that any real positive step would take place, noting that the American Medical Association issued a similar apology in 2008 for its "racist" history of more than 100 years of promoting or accepting racial inequality negatively, and excluding African American doctors, without offering anything actual or realistic after this apology.

Critics inside and outside the APA have made clear that the association needs to overcome significant obstacles to fix its problems and address its racial equity issues in a meaningful way, including the association’s diagnostic biases, the persistent shortage of black psychiatrists, and a physical structure that tends to exclude people who cannot pay for services out of pocket. This may make the crisis of racism in psychiatry too deep and entrenched to be resolved with an “apology” and a “promise” of reform. This was confirmed in the summer of 2020, when Dr. Ruth Shim, director of cultural psychiatry and professor of clinical psychiatry at the University of California, Davis, left the APA, explaining her departure in a tone that expressed her frustration and frustration and in the important statement that “institutional racism is an existential crisis in psychiatry.”

  - Arwa Nagib

Dehumanizing Opponents as an Instrument of Supremacism: "human animals"

Dehumanizing Opponents as an Instrument of Supremacism: "human animals"

    Monday, July 15, 2024   No comments

We have not forgotten the descriptions and expressions that Yoav Galant, the occupation's Minister of War, made at the beginning of the Israeli war on the Gaza Strip, when he said, "Israel is fighting human animals and is acting accordingly," until he returned, after more than nine months of the war of extermination that "Israel" is practicing in the Strip, to repeat the same descriptions about the resistance and its people. Is it a coincidence that Galant, followed by Netanyahu, returned two or three days later to the same speech, or is the matter related to considerations and a general context that governs Israeli colonial behavior. The expressions that Minister Galant used at the time, or those he uses today, were not born of the moment of the shock of the flood or the "outburst of anger" that was generated in Israeli society immediately after October 7, as some like to describe it, and this behavior of "Israel" is not a new policy that it is practicing today, but rather an extension of a colonial policy that it has been practicing for many years, the title of which is death, destruction, pain and terror, and what it produced in this war is nothing but a double mixture of the same horrors.

Looking at "others" with inferiority, from a position of superiority, as something "different", as "goyim", primitives, or "human animals" living in this universe that is harnessed to serve the "chosen Jew" and is fed by a huge store of hatred and arrogance.

This superior, “Western in origin” view of the “backward” world has not disappeared since the time of colonial Europe, just as racism has not disappeared today in the Zionist racial mentality, even after 9 months of massacres, and even after these racist, supremacist descriptions were used against “Israel” and its leaders by the South African representative and by judges in the International Court of Justice.

Although it was met with strong international human rights rejection, as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch considered the statements of the occupation’s minister of war “disgusting and an explicit call to commit war massacres,” Netanyahu and his Zionist minister of war still see Gaza as a “human animal cage,” slaughtering whoever he wants, whenever he wants, and however he wants, then razing it to the ground, and torturing its “primitive” people, who are cut off from electricity, water, and food, just as the Minister’s European ancestors did with the “human animals” they brought from Senegal and the Congo until they died of thirst, cold, and disease outside the walls of the Roman Catholic Church in Brussels, because they are “human animals, nothing more.” This description, which Galant deliberately and provocatively uses, is enough to indicate Israel's intention, coupled with action, to do everything and anything to take revenge on the Palestinians, even if this revenge results in killing children and the elderly and demolishing hospitals, shelters, schools and mosques on the heads of the displaced. As long as these are just "human animals", any harm that Israel inflicts on them, no matter how heinous, is "permissible and legitimate because they deserve it".

More importantly, in addition to what we have indicated about the deep-rootedness of this approach in the Israeli consciousness and behavior since the inception of this usurping entity, understanding the Israeli reaction, which adopts a policy of complete destruction without restrictions and without any regard for the rules of international humanitarian law, requires understanding the backgrounds and motives that specifically drive it today and push its leaders to return and insist on repeating its ABCs, especially describing the Palestinians as "human animals".

The first of these motives is to reproduce the narrative of the war and its spirit within Israeli society as if it were its first day, so that Israeli society remains led by its government and its agenda, thus silencing all voices and protests calling for an end to the war and demanding a negotiating path that leads to political arrangements, allowing Netanyahu and his partners to evade the societal accountability that will end the rule of this extremist right-wing coalition if the war stops, as if the charge of anger that is being fueled by the continued evocation of the narrative of “human animals” will, over time, reduce the extent of what many of them described as the massive military and security failure on October 7 and what followed. Because this narrative needs support to remain present in the consciousness of Israelis and the world, it must continue to be reminded and broadcast through media platforms from time to time. The second is the fierce competition in which the leaders of "Israel" compete to incite against the Palestinians and the people of Gaza in particular, as Israeli politicians, military personnel and religious men excel in inciting against the Palestinians, to the point that repeatedly describing the Palestinians as "animals" has become an essential part of their political discourse.

In this race of incitement, "Israel", its leadership and its army are using everything they have at their disposal without limits, crushing all of Gaza and leveling it to the ground without mercy. For the people of Gaza and Palestine in general, mercy has always been outside the dictionary of Israeli aggression, which means that the repeated mention of "human animals" in Galant and Netanyahu's speech was nothing more than a "natural" description in the context of the spirit of war and fighting that has inhabited Israeli society since its inception.

The third is that "peaceful" and "civilized" "Israel" must weave its vision of the other "barbaric and backward" party, as the Palestinians are not human beings, and it is determined to give the world a new narrative that moves it from the position of self-defense to the position of "exterminating animals", while preserving its "humanity".

In order to ensure that it "whitens its image and behavior", Israel must continue to criminalize and dehumanize the "other", to ensure that the world does not turn against it while it exterminates "these animals", accusing it of confronting what it calls "atrocities" with greater atrocities, and what it calls "terrorism" with more horrific terrorism. This is what was expressed by the position of the Chief of Staff of the occupation army, Herzi Halevi, a few months after the beginning of the war, when he said: "We fight with determination and remain human, unlike the other side that fights like animals."

The fourth motive is the contempt for international law and its institutions, as "Israel" has a superior ability to destroy, and its history is littered with the rubble of cities and villages and human remains, and its record also has a long history of destroying international law, kicking it and turning its back on it, as Netanyahu stood proudly a few days ago, saying: "We have proven that no force in the world can stop us."

Because international law, when it comes to "Israel", is very theoretical, very timid, very weak, and far removed from reality, all its prohibitions are violated and violated to the point of insane chaos as long as the victim is a "Palestinian Arab" and the killer is an "Israeli Jew." Perhaps this is also a message to those who rely on the rules of international law and the Geneva Conventions, and bet on "rationalizing" "Israel's" behavior and preventing it from targeting unarmed civilians, as the Israeli army, according to Galant, does not see itself bound by these agreements, as it kills "human" animals, and these rules and agreements do not include them. It seems that stripping opponents of their humanity has become a basic method in racist wars, and "Israel" is the protégé of the colonial West and its creation and image, imitating today, as it used to do in the past, what its early Western European colonial ancestors did, and it is inhabited by narratives of violence that shape the public conscience in "Israel", and in which religion, culture, and art intertwine by pressing the trigger of the fire that Gaza is burning with Today, the earth is uprooted and its "human animals" are burned alive.

_________

Muhammad Halsa, Writer and researcher; content of byline articles express the opinion of author(s).

Media Review: Haaretz asks, "Did the right-wing celebration of the Rafah massacre reveal the “ugly face” of Israel?"

Media Review: Haaretz asks, "Did the right-wing celebration of the Rafah massacre reveal the “ugly face” of Israel?"

    Tuesday, May 28, 2024   No comments

Some say that the Israeli right's celebration of the massacre of civilians in Rafah is the true ugly face of Israel, making those who believe or actually know that there is a "different Israel" face an impossible challenge in their quest to prove the opposite.

This is what is summarized by an article in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, which confirmed at the beginning that the massacre that took place in the Palestinian city of Rafah last Sunday was inevitable, as regardless of how accurate the Israeli military strikes were, and in light of the presence of more than a million Palestinian refugees in the region’s camps, it was inevitable, Sooner or later, this will cause mass human casualties.

 She explained that this Israeli raid caused widespread destruction, killing at least 45 people, and the footage showed civilians floundering in tents surrounded by hell.

 As usual, the article's author, Alison Kaplan Sommer, says Israel's leaders, citizens, and supporters abroad were ready to defend Israel's "moral" army.

 The writer pointed out that they expressed their rejection and denunciation of any accusation that the aggression could have been avoided, or any suggestion that what happened was intentional, including the use of words such as “genocide” or “massacre.”

 Such accusations are “an inaccurate distortion of the truth at best and vile anti-Semitism at worst,” they claim.

 “But before they could do it this time, it became painfully clear from the beginning that their efforts would be in vain,” Sommer said.

 Far-right media voices in Israel soon began celebrating the fires, and thus the deaths of those engulfed in the flames, by jokingly comparing the images to the memorial bonfires lit on Lag Baomer - the Jewish holiday that fell on the same day as the massacre.

 She added that these extremists expressed their happiness that this fire was “the central bonfire in Rafah,” wishing those affected a “Happy Eid,” in tweets that were later deleted, but they will not be forgotten, and will be referred to as evidence that the fire was intentional, and was even celebrated, As she said.

 Sommer explained that the most prominent journalist who fanned the flames of hatred is Yinon Magal, who is constantly proven to be Itamar Ben Gvir by the Israeli media, and it seems that, like the extremist minister, he rejoices and is proud of the insolent manifestations that indicate disdain for the lives of the Palestinians and denial of their humanity.

 She concluded that Ben Gvir and Magal's behavior provides sufficient evidence of malicious intentions to obstruct any attempt by Israel to defend the behavior of its army, which makes erasing the image of "the ugly face of Israel" difficult for those who believe that it has another side.

Another US governmental official and a Biden Appointee, who is also Jewish, resign protesting Biden's handling of the war in Gaza calling it a Genocide

Another US governmental official and a Biden Appointee, who is also Jewish, resign protesting Biden's handling of the war in Gaza calling it a Genocide

    Friday, May 17, 2024   No comments

In a move that some observers described as a resounding rejection of Biden's handling of the war in Gaza, a high-ranking Jewish employee in the administration of US President Joe Biden announced her resignation from her position on Wednesday, due to what she described as his disastrous and ongoing support for the Israeli war on the Gaza Strip.

In an article published by the Washington Post, Lily Greenberg Call, Special Assistant to the Chief of Staff at the Interior Ministry, cited her Jewish upbringing and relationship with Israel and recounted how her family fled from Europe to America to escape anti-Semitic persecution there.

In her resignation letter (see below), Greenberg Call - who made the first public resignation by a Jew over Biden's support for Israel - wrote, "I can no longer in good conscience continue to represent this administration amid President Biden's disastrous and continuing support for the genocide in Gaza."

In an interview she conducted with writer Yasmine Abu Talib Yasmine Abu Talib, Greenberg Call said that resigning was a difficult decision because of the society in which she grew up, but the Jewish values ​​in which she was raised led her to make this decision.

“Judaism is the most important part of my identity, and all the values ​​I was raised with and all my Jewish education are what led me to this decision,” Greenberg Call said. She added, "What Israel is doing in Gaza and to the Palestinians throughout the land does not represent the Jews and is a shame to our ancestors."

Commenting on her position in the Biden administration, she said, “Everyone here is thinking about achieving the American dream and rising to the top, but I asked myself several times during the past eight months: What is the benefit of power if it is not used to stop crimes against humanity?”

Earlier this week, a US Army major working for the Defense Intelligence Agency resignedUS Army major working for the Defense Intelligence Agency resigned, writing in an open letter that he felt “incredibly ashamed and guilty” when he realized that his work contributed to the suffering and killing of Palestinians.

A political official also resigned from the Ministry of Education last January, and an employee at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs who worked on transporting weapons to foreign countries last October.

In february of this year, U.S. airman Aaron Bushnell U.S. airman Aaron Bushnell set himself on fire at the Israeli embassy in Washington, D.C., after he described his action while walking to the location as an extreme act of protest against the war in Gaza—a desperate plea to “free Palestine,” as he screamed while flames engulfed his body.

As early as October of last year, some US officials, including State Department officials, have resigned rejecting Biden's blind support of a genocidal war in Gaza.

Whi is Lily Greenberg Call

 An American Jewish politician and human rights activist at the local and international levels. She served as Special Assistant to the Chief of Staff at the US Department of the Interior, and participated in the election campaigns of US President Joe Biden and his Vice President, Kamala Harris.

She worked for many years within Zionist groups supporting Israel, then took an anti-occupation stance, opposed violence in the occupied Palestinian territories, and called for peaceful coexistence between Palestinians and Jews.

Lily Greenberg Cole was born and raised in San Diego, California. Her origins go back to a Jewish family that immigrated to the United States of America to escape the persecution practiced against Jews in Europe.

Her family lived on Ellis Island, New York, and spent decades suffering under the weight of racial discrimination, which affected Lily's upbringing and her vision of issues of justice and discrimination.

Greenberg grew up in a Jewish community in which unconditional support for Israel prevails, to the point where it is considered part of the Jewish identity, so she was a prominent youth in pro-Israel activism in her high school years, and has been involved in the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) since her freshman year of high school. She was elected president of the Israel Defense Club at her school.

When she was 16 years old, she went on a trip to the occupied territories and stayed there for a full year, as part of a program for the “Jewish Youth” movement, which included making trips in the occupying state and joining educational courses. Among the activities were meetings with Palestinian teenagers, the goal of which was Developing the spirit of coexistence between the two parties.

When she joined the University of California, she joined pro-Israel groups, and became the leader of a student movement supporting Israel and known within the university.

In 2017, she led a trip to Israel, organized by the Hillel Berkeley Jewish Student Center. Students from a wide range of ethnic and religious backgrounds joined the trip, visited Palestinian cities such as Bethlehem and Ramallah, and met Palestinians and settlers.

Greenberg worked for many years as an activist to defend Israel, but experiences began to change her convictions. During a relief mission in Greece, she forged friendly relations with refugees of Palestinian origins, developed deep relationships with Palestinians through academic programs, and established close relationships with Palestinian Americans during periods of study and campaigns. Electoral relations, and those relations had a significant impact on changing the ideas on which they grew up.

In her article about severing its relationship with AIPAC, Lilly stated that she realized that the organization, through its unconditional support for the Israeli government, was supporting violence, which was contrary to its values, and so she joined to work with other groups.

Greenberg also worked with non-Zionist organizations, such as the "If Not Now" organization, which opposes the Israeli occupation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

  

Reviewing Naomi Klein’s Declaration of Exodus from Zionism

Reviewing Naomi Klein’s Declaration of Exodus from Zionism

    Thursday, May 16, 2024   No comments

On the eve of the Jewish Passover, and at his “Seder” celebration in the streets of New York, which was witnessed by Jews and non-Jews, Naomi Klein, the Canadian Jewish writer and activist, professor of climate justice and director of the Center for Climate Justice at the University of British Columbia, delivered a memorable speech representing “Declaration of Exodus” for the Jews of the world from Zionism and its false idol in Palestine, in which it used two symbols from the Old Testament that have a very important significance for Jews of all times: - The Book of Exodus, one of the five books of the Torah, which tells the story of the exodus of the children of Israel, led by the Prophet Moses, from the captivity of Pharaoh. In biblical Egypt, the Exodus is the moment of liberation from captivity.

- And the story of the golden calf that the Samaritan made and which the Children of Israel took as a god in the absence of Moses, when he preceded them to the appointed time of his Lord, but the Samaritan led them astray, and they broke their appointment with Moses. It is a moment of tremendous setback for the Children of Israel’s journey with God, the prophets, and prophecy.

Klein recalled the moment of Moses descending from the mountain and his extreme anger when he found the children of Israel worshiping a “golden calf,” calling for the rejection of the worship of the new “golden calf,” by which she meant “the false idol of Zionism.” Klein said, before a gathering of Americans (the majority of whom were anti-war Jews), in a protest calling for an end to arming Israel, which was held in Brooklyn (New York), near the home of the majority leader in the US Senate, Senator Chuck Schumer: “Many members of our (Jewish) community worship a false idol.” ... They are delighted with it... They are drunk... The idol has defiled them... This false idol is called Zionism,” she said, considering that “Zionism is a false idol that took the idea of ​​the Promised Land and turned it into a bill of sale for an ethno-military state.” “It is a false idol that takes our deepest biblical stories of justice and freedom from slavery — the Easter story itself — and turns them into brutal weapons of land theft and colonization, and road maps for ethnic cleansing and genocide,” she added. “It is a false idol that has taken the transcendent idea of ​​the Promised Land, a metaphor for human liberation that has traveled through multiple religions to every corner of this world, and has dared to turn it into a bill of sale to a militaristic ethno-state.”

Also, Klein rejected Zionism's claims about liberating Jews from anti-Semitism and securing them in a Jewish state of their own, saying that "the version of liberation proposed by political Zionism is itself worldly." From the beginning, it required the mass expulsion of Palestinians from their homes and ancestral lands during the Nakba,” noting that “from the beginning (Zionism) was at war with dreams of liberation. It is worth remembering in the Easter celebration that this includes dreams of liberation and self-determination for the Egyptian people. This false Zionist idol equates Israel’s security with the Egyptian dictatorship and client states.”

 Zionism and genocide

Likewise, Klein spoke about the genocidal nature of the Zionist project against the people of Palestine and its immoral essence, saying that Zionism “produced an ugly type of freedom that viewed Palestinian children, not as human beings, but as a demographic threat, just as the Pharaoh in the Book of Exodus feared the increasing population.” Of the children of Israel, and therefore ordered the killing of their children. Zionism has brought us to the present moment of catastrophe, and it is time to say clearly: it always leads us here. “It is a false idol that has led many of our people down a very immoral path, making them now justified in tearing up the basic commandments: Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not covet.”

She also called for protest and the Jews’ exit from Zionism, just as they left Pharaonic captivity, and to disavow the Zionist entity and its crimes, saying: “We, in these streets for months and months, are the exit. Leaving Zionism. It is a false idol that equates Jewish freedom with cluster bombs that kill and maim Palestinian children. Zionism is a false idol that has betrayed all Jewish values, including the value we place on asking questions. “It is a practice rooted in Easter with its four questions asked by the youngest child, including the love we have as a people for text and teaching.” She added: “Today, this false idol justifies the bombing of every university in Gaza. The destruction of countless schools, archives, and printing presses; Hundreds of academics, journalists and poets were killed. This is what the Palestinians call educational genocide, that is, killing the means of education.”

 No to an ethnic Jewish state

“Meanwhile, in this city,” Klein continued, “universities are calling in the NYPD and barricading themselves against the dangerous threat posed by their students who dare to ask them basic questions, like: How can you claim to believe in anything at all, least of all of us, when you By enabling, investing in, and cooperating with this genocide? “The false idol of Zionism has been allowed to grow unchecked for too long.” She added: “So we say tonight: It all ends here.” Our Judaism cannot contain an ethnic state, because our Judaism is international in nature. Our Judaism cannot be protected by the rampaging military establishment of that (ethnic) state, because all the army does is sow sadness and reap hatred, including against us as Jews,” noting that “our Judaism is not threatened by people who raise their voices in solidarity with Palestine. Crossing lines of race, ethnicity, physical ability, gender identity and generations. Our Judaism is one of those voices, and it knows that in this chorus of voices lies our collective safety and liberation.”

Klein added, “Our Judaism is Passover Judaism: gathering in celebration to share food and wine with loved ones and strangers alike, a ritual that is portable by nature, light enough to carry on our backs, and we need nothing but each other: no walls, no temple, no Rabbi, there is a role for everyone, even - especially - the youngest children.” He considered that “the Passover Seder is a diaspora technology if there is one, and it is designed for collective grief, contemplation, asking questions, remembering, and reviving the revolutionary spirit.” So, look around. This, here, is our Judaism. While the waters rise and the forests burn and nothing is certain, we pray on the altar of solidarity and mutual assistance, whatever the cost.”

Liberation of Judaism

Klein added: “We do not need or want the false idol of Zionism.” We want freedom from the project that commits genocide in our name. Freedom from an ideology that has no plan for peace other than dealing with the murderous theocratic petro-states next door, while selling automated assassination techniques to the world. We seek to liberate Judaism from the ethno-state that wants Jews to feel perpetual fear, wants our children to be afraid, wants us to believe that the world is against us, so that we run to its fortress and under its iron dome, or - at the very least - to keep the weapons and donations flowing. That is a false idol.” According to Klein, the matter is not limited to “Netanyahu only, but the world that created it and created it: it is Zionism,” asking, “Who are we?” We, in these streets for months and months, are getting out… Leaving Zionism. And to the likes of the Chuck Schumers of this world, we do not say: “Let our people come out (from the captivity of Zionism).” Rather, we say: We have already left. And your children? They are with us now.” Exit statement finished.

 Resuming the battle against Zionism

The United States witnessed a decisive battle between Reform Judaism and the Zionist project, fought by the American Council for Judaism (the organization of observant American Jews) under the slogan that Jews are not a nationality but a religious group, and that it is necessary to revive the principles of Reform Judaism, whose rabbis have opposed Zionism since before World War First, they supported equal rights for Jews in the countries in which they lived. This battle was led by Elmer Berger (1908-1996), the Reform Jewish rabbi and writer, emancipated from Zionist thought, and who stood against Zionist intellectual terrorism. He contributed to the establishment and leadership of the “American Council of Judaism” with the aim of confronting the establishment of the Zionist state, because it does not represent all Jews in any national or political sense. He devoted his life, efforts, and writings to the issue of Palestine and opposing Zionism, exposing its claims, and warning Jews of its myths and dangers.

It is worth mentioning here that the United States, under the administration of Harry Truman, was the first country in the world to recognize the Zionist state, five minutes after announcing its establishment on May 15, 1948. On that day, everyone thought that Rabbi Elmer Berger and Reform Judaism had been defeated and had lost their battle against Zionism once and for all. But one who contemplates the statement of the Jewish “exit” from Zionism and the repudiation of the “settlement wheel,” in the heart of New York, as well as the popular movement across religions, generations, and races in the streets of the Western Metropolitan and its ancient universities, which was launched by the “Al-Aqsa Flood,” sees the resumption of Rabbi Elmer Berger’s battle against Zionism. The battle is not over, but is being fought with greater energy, broader horizons, and greater momentum.