THE ABSURD IMES
This is where we are heading if what has become of the Republican Party is to continue. Please offend these people whenever you have the need. No need to tolerate B.S.
Any ideas as to how much this bit of nonsense cost us? How about cost you individually?
Here is where it sounds like stand-up comedy, or just another joke, but as best one can tell from Israeli sources (and they are about as trustworthy as the BBC is about the "Royal Family"), any idea as to how bad Netenyahu was? "No, how bad was he?" I'll tell you how bad he was: he was so bad that he was defeated by a candidate to the right of him, with the support of ALL other parties combined. He was Israel's Donald Trump.
One final preparatory note: How much of this information have you seen on mainstream media in the U. S.? You should also be aware that, while the House Hearings on 1/6 were being held, they were being covered by several networks. I watched on CSPAN, but MSNBC, CNN, AND FOX all carried them. A graph showed ratings for those three networks. While they slanted sharply upwards on MSNBC AND CNN, they slanted just as sharply down on FOX. That needs no analysis.
On israel, however, can you think of one single other country in the entire world that the U. S. allows to dictate policy to it other than Israel? At one time, very conservative pundits, people such as William F. Buckley, proposed making Israel a state. It sounded absurd at the time, but right now, it might give Israel less control over U. S. policy. Perhaps adding D.C. as a state would help as well?
Killers
by
Tsar Conic
For ahile, I found it amusing to think about how Ben and Jerry's Ice Cream had "persecuted" poor harmless Israel. The two jews who popularized their ice cream were suddenly "anit-semitic" and evil. I mean, coming up with a flavor called "Cherry Garcia," – how evil can they get? Terrorizing the poor, helpless, state of Israel – how low can they get? Such persecution! All over the world, Jews and cringing in terror in fear that someone will leave a container of Cherry Garcia on their front porch. After two thousand years of suffering, and Cherry Garcia winds up on their front porch. Soon, no more Swastikas, just posters of The Grateful Dead. Oh, Lord, how low, how much suffering is ahead?
Despite all this, I am irritated because it is not what I really want to do as my first edition of August and that is irritating. Still, somehow, this information needs to be spread as widely as possible. Most likely, the truth will not make a damn bit of difference, but it is all we have. The U.S. spends billions of dollars a year on Israel, simply gives it to them, for whatever they want, and that's that. All of the people complain about forgiving Student Loans (which should not be needed in the first place), spending all that money to lift people out of poverty (what a waste when we could be building weapons to use on other people), getting rid of black people and people who speak Spanish, but giving money to Israel will save us all.
To be sure, many sane Jewish organizations such as J Street and others (I imagine the Jewish Voice for Peace will pitch in as well), oppose the vicious actions done in their name. This is not a religious or ethnic issue – it is about money and power. There is no point in taking this further.
Here is an interview, or couple of interviews, that cover things fairly will and they are spread here as a Public service. They are taken from a transcript provided by Democracy Now, which can be reached at Democracynow.org, and is available for viewing or listening, free of charge. There is a direct link just below:
Human Rights Watch is calling on the International Criminal Court to open a probe into apparent Israeli war crimes committed during its recent 11-day assault on Gaza that killed 260 Palestinians, including 66 children. We discuss a major report HRW released this week that closely examines three Israeli strikes that killed 62 Palestinians civilians in May. U.S.-made weapons were used in at least two of the attacks investigated. Human Rights Watch concluded Israel had committed apparent war crimes. "You had people's entire lives — their homes, their businesses, their wives, their children, their husbands — gone in a flash," says Omar Shakir, Israel and Palestine Director at Human Rights Watch, who helped lead the investigation. "The international community focuses on Gaza maybe when there are armed hostilities. But two months later these families continue to deal with the aftermath of the devastation wrought upon their lives."
This is viewer supported news. Please do your part today.
DONATE
More from this Interview
Transcript
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, Democracynow.org, the War and Peace Report. I'm Amy Goodman.
Human Rights Watch is calling on the International Criminal Court to open a probe into apparent Israeli war crimes committed during its recent 11-day assault on Gaza that killed 260 Palestinians, including 66 children. Human Rights Watch concluded Israel had committed apparent war crimes after closely examining three Israeli strikes that killed 62 Palestinian civilians in May. U.S.-made weapons were used in at least two of the attacks investigated. Human Rights Watch released this video to accompany its new report. A warning to our audience, the video contains graphic content, including the sounds of military attacks on civilians.
NARRATOR: On May 10, 2021, 11 days of hostilities began between the Israeli military and Palestinian armed groups, including Hamas, in the Gaza Strip and Israel. The fighting took place amid escalating repression in occupied East Jerusalem and the prolonged closure of the Gaza Strip. These policies and practices reflect the Israeli government's crimes against humanity of apartheid and persecution.
PEOPLE: [shouting and screaming]
NARRATOR: Human Rights Watch conducted in-depth investigations into three Israel strikes that killed 62 Palestinian civilians and involved serious violations of the laws of war and apparent war crimes.
PERSON: Human Rights Watch will be reporting in August 2021 on Palestinian armed group attacks that caused civilian casualties.
NARRATOR: In the northeastern corner of the Gaza Strip, outside Beit Hanoun town shortly after 6:00 p.m. on May 10, a guided missile struck near four houses belonging to the extended al-Masri family. Members of the family were packing processed barley for animal feed into sacks at the time.
YOUSSEF ATALLAH AL-MASRI: [translated] My brother Ibrahim and I were around 150 to 200 meters away. When they struck our children, we were facing the events. We saw it with our own eyes when they were hit. I ran to them right away. I found our children scattered. They were scattered on the floor, ripped to pieces, blood and brain fragments.
PEOPLE: [shouting]
NARRATOR: Israeli authorities have said that the attack involved a misfired Palestinian rocket coming from the West but have produced no evidence to back up this claim. Witnesses saw a munition approaching them from the east, from Israel. Based on munition remnants found at the scene of the attack and witnesses' descriptions, we determined that the six children and two adults were most likely killed by a type of guided missile used to attack military vehicles or personnel in the open. Six days after the attack, the Israeli authorities also included the photo of one man killed in the Beit Hanoun attack on a list of militant group activists they said had been killed in unspecified locations. Human Rights Watch's interviews with witnesses who knew him indicate the man was a civilian. Our research uncovered no evidence of a military target at or near the site. We therefore found the attack to be unlawful.
MOHAMMAD ATTALAH AL-MASRI: [translated] It was a scene I could never expect. Everyone cries and screams every day. Do you know what my wife wants? She wants me to sell the house. She cannot accept how her children were all killed.
NARRATOR: Al-Shati Refugee Camp, located northwest of Gaza City, is one of the most densely populated places in the world. At about 1:40 a.m. on May 15, an Israeli airstrike destroyed a three-story building in the camp, killing two women and eight of their children.
ALAA ABU HATTAB: [translated] I lived with my wife and five children in the house. Our home was filled with love, peace, and happiness. We had been living here for 30 years. There was no prior notice, no phone call, no order to vacate. That night I went to buy bread for dinner. All of a sudden there were sounds of explosion in the air. I found that my own home had been struck.
PEOPLE: [shouting]
NARRATOR: The Israeli military said it struck the building because senior Hamas officials were there. It also separately said that they had targeted a bunker under or near the building. None of the witnesses Human Rights Watch interviewed were aware of any militants or other military targets in or near the building. The Israeli authorities have presented no such evidence.
PEOPLE: [shouting]
ALAA ABU HATTAB: [translated] I had a reality. I had a dream here. I had a family here. Now I have no family and no home. My only daughter and I are on the street. They destroyed everything in my life. They destroyed my life entirely.
NARRATOR: At about 1:00 a.m. on May 16, the Israeli military launched a four-minute attack in the heart of Gaza City along five streets including Al-Wahda Street, causing three multistory residential buildings to collapse.
OMAR ABU EL-OUF: [translated] Me, my father and mother, and my brother and sister, we started hearing the sound of loud explosions. After the second missile landed, the house started to sway right and left as if it were about to fall down and collapse. I pulled my sister by the arm towards the hallway and held her in order to shield her. And suddenly, we saw the third missile coming from the window, and the hallway's entire wall collapsed, and the whole floor suddenly disappeared, and everything fell on us. And afterwards, the fourth missile came down on us and destroyed everything.
NARRATOR: Human Rights Watch determined that the three buildings collapsed after missiles struck the road or sidewalk next to the buildings. The Israeli military said that they targeted tunnels used by armed groups. Later they said the attack had targeted an underground command center, but without providing any details or evidence.
OMAR ABU EL-OUF: [translated] Why did they kill my family? Why did they kill my mother and father? Why did they turn me into an orphan? Who will in the end give me justice?
NARRATOR: The attacks killed 44 civilians, including 14 women, 12 men and 18 children. It also injured about 50 others. The Israeli military used powerful weapons in a heavily populated residential area putting the lives of scores of civilians at risk. Since then they have produced no evidence of a military target in the vicinity to justify the attack. If there was a military target, they have also not shown that it was important enough to justify the risk to civilians. As a result, these attacks were unlawful. The U.N. says that Israeli airstrikes in May killed at least 129 civilians, including 66 children. The Israeli military said that Palestinian armed groups in Gaza fired more than 4,360 rockets and mortars towards Israel between May 10 and May 21, resulting in 12 civilian deaths, including two children. Several Palestinians also died in Gaza when rockets fired by armed groups fell short and landed in Gaza. Rockets that Palestinian armed groups fire at Israel are inherently indiscriminate when directed toward areas with civilians. Their use in such circumstances violates the laws of war and amounts to war crimes. For years, Israeli and Palestinian authorities have systematically failed to credibly investigate alleged war crimes. The International Criminal Court prosecutor should investigate Israeli attacks in Gaza that evidently killed civilians unlawfully, rocket attacks by Palestinian armed groups against Israel that violate the laws of war, and other grave abuses, including the crimes against humanity of apartheid and persecution.
AMY GOODMAN: That new video produced by Human Rights Watch. The video was released along with a new report titled Gaza: Apparent War Crimes During May Fighting. We are joined now by Omar Shakir, Israel and Palestine Director at Human Rights Watch. He is joining us from Amman, Jordan. What were you most shocked by in these interviews, in this investigation into what happened in Israel's last attack on Gaza?
OMAR SHAKIR: Amy, some of the testimonies that we collected are among the most harrowing I have ever come across in my four and a half years working on Israel-Palestine. You had strikes that wiped out entire families. You had cases where families were reduced from having seven or eight kids to having one surviving member of their family. You had people's entire lives, their homes, their businesses, their wives, their children, their husbands gone in a flash. And those testimonies are so important for us to discuss today because the international community focuses on Gaza maybe when there are armed hostilities, but two months later, these families continue to deal with the aftermath of the devastation wrought upon their lives. And it's critically important to them and to all victims of grave human rights abuse that there is accountability for these serious abuses and that steps are taken by the international community to prevent yet another cycle of bloodshed and repression. This wasn't the first and it won't be the last unless we take grave, definitive action.
AMY GOODMAN: What has been the response of the Israeli government to your report, Omar? To Human Rights Watch's report?
OMAR SHAKIR: Human Rights Watch wrote to the Israeli government in June. We specified the strikes that we were looking into. We sent them a number of detailed questions. They replied to our letter saying that they were not obligated under Israeli law to answer our questions and providing a list of general assertions, stating, for example, that they took measures to minimize the impact from their strikes. That fault belongs to Hamas because according to them they fire from populated areas. And saying that of course they would investigate these strikes. But these are the same allegations, these are the same claims they trot out each time. They did so in 2008, in 2012, in 2014, in 2018, in 2019. And they are doing so again today. The reality is that there is a whitewash mechanism within Israel that ensures that these abuses are not investigated, that impunity is the norm. And that is why it is so important that the International Criminal Court include these attacks as well as their larger context, including apartheid and persecution, in the formal probe that they are currently working on.
AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to ask you about the change in perception in the United States about what is happening with the Israeli government and the occupation. I remember that front page photo display. It was Friday, May 28th. And the headline was, "They were just children." And it shows scores of more than 65 children's faces in Gaza who died in the attack.
OMAR SHAKIR: That sort of reporting should be the norm, Amy, and it is unfortunate that for too many years, that has not been the case. The reality here is for too often Palestinian deaths, when they are covered—I mean, just this week as you mentioned in the lead to the news program today, you had a 20-year-old Palestinian who was killed. Killed while in a protest over the killing of a 12-year-old. And an organization, whose work is the defense for children in international Palestine, to document children's deaths, had their offices raided this week by the Israeli army. Too often, these sorts of events do not make the international news cycle. These sorts of events highlight the crimes against humanity of apartheid and persecution. There is certainly, Amy, growing awareness, I think, that apartheid and persecution are the reality for millions of Palestinians. I think we saw a shift in the latest hostilities, including members of the U.S. Congress, who did not just focus on the latest Palestinian rocket or Israeli airstrike, but looked at what they described as root causes of the conflict. Looking at the larger context, the discriminatory treatment of Palestinians. That is so important, because the first step to solving any problem is to diagnose it correctly. So recognition needs to happen. And then the action needs to be taken that is commensurate with that problem, in this case ending complicity with grave crimes as well as ensuring accountability for them.
AMY GOODMAN: You talked about the killing of the 12-year-old Palestinian boy. He was named Mohammed al-Alami, sat in the backseat of his father's car in an Israeli checkpoint north of Hebron. The 11th Palestinian child killed by Israeli forces in the occupied West Bank this year. That is according to Defense for Children International, which publicized Mohammed's killing on Wednesday. Yesterday, Israeli forces raided the group's main office, seizing files about Palestinian children in Israeli detention. Can you comment on this?
OMAR SHAKIR: Absolutely. There has been a systematic assault on human rights advocacy, on the individuals and groups that are reporting, documenting, speaking out against the reality of Israeli repression. For international groups, that can take the form of denials of entry or deportation. For Israeli groups, it can be smear campaigns. But Palestinian groups face it the worst. This is not the only example of the army raiding a human rights organization. It happened a couple of years ago with the group Addameer. And it is not limited to that. As we speak, there are Palestinian human rights defenders that are sitting in an Israeli prison over their activism and advocacy. There are Palestinian human rights defenders who face a travel ban, a punitive ban that seems linked to the work they do promoting awareness and calling for an end to Israeli repression. So it is important for the international community to speak out to defend the space for human rights advocacy and human rights groups to operate. Because if the international community cannot protect the space for human rights groups to report on human rights abuse, how are they ever going to stop human rights abuse in the first place? These are not one-offs. This is part of a systematic practice, and it must end.
AMY GOODMAN: Omar Shakir is Israel and Palestine Director at Human Rights Watch. We will link to your report Gaza: Apparent War Crimes During May Fighting. And Omar, we are going to ask you to stay with us for our next segment as we look at the fallout from Ben & Jerry's decision to halt ice cream sales in Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank. The Israeli government claims the move is anti-Semitic, but many Jewish groups, including J Street, support Ben & Jerry's decision. Stay with us.
Israel has launched what has been described as a maximum pressure campaign against Ben & Jerry's and its parent company Unilever, after the iconic ice cream brand announced it would halt sales in Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank. Israel has asked 35 U.S. governors to enforce state laws which make it a crime to support the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, or BDS. The founders of Ben & Jerry's, who no longer have operational control of the company, have defended the company's decision. A number of Jewish groups including J Street, the New Israel Fund and Americans for Peace Now, all of whom oppose BDS, have defended Ben & Jerry's decision and rejected accusations that the company's decision was antisemitic. "What we are seeing is an aggressive, over the top, full-court press from senior officials in the Israeli government … to target Ben & Jerry's simply for the fact that they made a principled decision to respect the distinction between the state of Israel and the territory that it occupies beyond the green line," says Logan Bayroff, Vice President of Communications of J-Street. "These anti-boycott laws aren't just posing issues under the first amendment, they're actually punishing companies that do the right thing by ending their complicity in human rights abuses," adds Omar Shakir, Israel and Palestine Director at Human Rights Watch.
This is viewer supported news. Please do your part today.
DONATE
More from this Interview
Transcript
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, Democracynow.org, the War and Peace Report. I'm Amy Goodman. Israel has launched what has been described as a maximum pressure campaign against Ben & Jerry's and its parent company, Unilever, after the iconic ice cream brand announced it is halting sales in Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank. Israel has asked 35 U.S. governors to enforce state laws which make it a crime to support the boycott, development and sanctions movement, or BDS. Last week the head of the New York State Common Retirement Fund wrote to Unilever saying it was examining whether Ben & Jerry's had violated state policy on Israeli boycotts. Meanwhile Brad Lander, the Democratic nominee for New York City comptroller, criticized the state's position saying, quote, "Actions that erase the distinction between Israel and its settlements in occupied territory are effectively endorsing annexation and today's unjust one-state status quo."
The founders of Ben & Jerry's, who no longer have operational control of the company, have defended the company's decision. Writing in The New York Times in an op-ed, Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield describe themselves as proud Jews and supporters of the state of Israel. They write, quote, "We believe this act can and should be seen as advancing the concepts of justice and human rights, core tenets of Judaism." Meanwhile, a number of Jewish groups including J Street, the New Israel Fund and Americans for Peace Now, all of whom oppose BDS, have defended Ben & Jerry's decision and rejected accusations that the company's decision was anti-Semitic.
We are joined now by Logan Bayroff, the Vice President of Communications of J Street. And still with us is Omar Shakir, Israel and Palestine Director at Human Rights Watch. We welcome you both to Democracy Now!. Let's begin with Logan. Talk about this maximum pressure campaign the Israeli government is bringing and the response to it around the United States.
LOGAN BAYROFF: Thank you for having me on, first of all. What we are seeing is an aggressive, over-the-top, full-court press from senior officials in the Israeli government, also from some senior leaders in right-leaning American Jewish and pro-Israel groups in the United States, to target Ben & Jerry's simply for the fact that they made a principled decision to respect the distinction between the state of Israel and the territory that it occupies beyond the Green line, and made a principled decision that while they are going to continue to do business in Israel, they no longer want to sell their ice cream in settlements that are illegal under international law in territory that is occupied and where Palestinians face systemic injustice.
And simply for making that principled decision, they are now facing calls to have constitutionally dubious anti boycott laws deployed against them to potentially prevent them from doing business in states across the country or to impose some sort of legal penalty or sanction on Ben & Jerry's or their parent company. They are facing accusations, as you said, that they are somehow anti-Semitic, that they are somehow dehumanizing the Jewish people even, or in league with terror. I mean, completely over-the-top, frankly insane accusations that I think are just designed to intimidate Ben & Jerry's, and not just a major ice cream company but all those, including many American Jews, who want to protest and speak out against the injustice of occupation, including groups like J Street that also consider ourselves to be pro-Israel but also support and care about Palestinian rights and understand that the occupation needs to be called out and needs to end if we are going to end the conflict and create a better future for both peoples.
AMY GOODMAN: This is U.S. State Department spokesperson Ned Price responding to questions on Ben & Jerry's earlier in the week.
NED PRICE: Well, I don't have a reaction to offer regarding the actions of a private company. But more broadly, what I will say is that we firmly reject the BDS movement, which unfairly singles out Israel. While the Biden-Harris administration will fully and always respect the First Amendment rights of our citizens, of the the American people, the United States will be a strong partner in fighting efforts around the world that potentially seek to delegitimize Israel and will work tirelessly to support Israel's further integration into the international community.
AMY GOODMAN: Logan Bayroff, if you can respond to Ned Price and also talk about the letter that your group, that J Street, New Israel Fund and others have written to 35 U.S. governors?
LOGAN BAYROFF: I'll take those—they're sort of related. I think it is notable that the Israeli government has been writing to governors rather than to the federal government. There has been an effort going on for years, as you know, to pass and push these really insidious, constitutionally dubious anti-BDS laws at the state level. There has also been efforts at the federal level that groups like J Street and others in the American Jewish community, and some in the pro-Israel community, have advocated to block. We have said this legislation does not represent the majority of the American Jewish community who thinks First Amendment rights are very important, who thinks that any form of boycott is protected political free speech that needs to be sacrosanct in this country, and who thinks that these attacks are dangerous and don't do anything to help American Jews or even in the long run to help Israel.
We have succeeded in blocking those at the federal level, but they have passed at the state level. And that's why you have this effort to the governors to try to sort of go around the power of the president or the power of Congress to conduct foreign policy and to try to have state governments intervening to punish companies or individuals because they want to speak out against the occupation or support Palestinian rights. That's what's going on here. J Street has joined friend of the court briefs in a number of cases where these laws have been struck down, in places like Arkansas, in places like Georgia. Just this year, courts have found some of these laws unconstitutional, and yet many are still being passed. Many are still on the books. And you have these legal efforts moving forward to target Ben & Jerry's I think as a test case, again to intimidate and suppress other companies or individuals who might want to come out and say, "We want to find a way to push back against what is happening in the occupied territory.
AMY GOODMAN: I want to bring Omar Shakir back into the conversation and get your response. Omar Shakir, with Human Rights Watch, based in Amman, Jordan, the Israel and Palestine director there. Axios had a very interesting piece on this maximum pressure campaign. They wrote "On July 22nd, the Israeli Foreign Ministry sent a classified cable to all Israeli diplomatic missions in North America and Europe ordering them to start a pressure campaign against Ben & Jerry's and Unilever in order to convince them to negotiate. Israeli diplomats were instructed to encourage Jewish organizations, pro-Israel advocacy groups, and evangelical communities to organize demonstrations in front of Ben & Jerry's and Unilever offices and put pressure on investors and distributors for both companies. The Foreign Ministry also asked the diplomats to push for public statements condemning the companies and to encourage public protest in the media and directly with key executives in both companies. The diplomats were also instructed to echo those protests on social media for maximum flexibility." And this final example—"The Israeli Embassy in Washington and the Israeli consulates around the U.S. were asked to push for the activation of anti-BDS—boycott, divestment and sanctions—legislation in several states and to engage with governors, mayors, members of Congress and state officials like attorneys general." Again, I was reading from Axios. Your response, Omar Shakir?
OMAR SHAKIR: it is clear that they are trying to follow the Airbnb model. What I'm referencing here is when Airbnb made a decision a couple of years ago to stop listing in the occupied West Bank because doing so made them complicit in serious human rights abuses, they undertook a similar strategy and they eventually bullied Airbnb into caving. The difference here is that Ben & Jerry's is a deeply principled company with clearly articulated values and are acting pursuant to this. This is a company that, at its core, takes the principles of human rights and social justice seriously.
The reality here, as Logan mentioned, is that settlements are illegal. They are war crimes under the fourth Geneva Convention. And when businesses operate in the West Bank, they are directly benefiting from and contributing to the entrenched discriminatory system there. What do I mean? I mean businesses that operate in the West Bank receive permits, access to infrastructure that are systematically denied to Palestinians. They are operating on or with land that was confiscated from Palestinians. They are providing jobs and revenue that goes into further entrenching these war crimes settlements. And they are also operating in a system in which you have dual legal regimes, and which in the very same store that sells Ben & Jerry's, if a Palestinian and Israeli happen to work there, they are governed under different systems, with different rights and protections.
So the reality here is that businesses under the U.N. guiding principles have a duty not to contribute to human rights abuses. That is a decision Ben & Jerry's made. It's a principled distinction following their international legal obligations. These anti-boycott laws are not just posing issues under the First Amendment; they are actually punishing companies that do the right thing by ending their complicity in human rights abuse. Human Rights Watch does business and human rights work around the world, and we are calling for companies that operate in settlements to do the same thing that companies who are involved in human rights abuses everywhere else do, which is end that complicity and rights abuse.
AMY GOODMAN: How exactly will this go down in Israel and the occupied territories? It won't take place for another year because of a contract that Ben & Jerry's has with the local distributor. Is that right, Omar?
OMAR SHAKIR: That is correct. In essence this decision says that they are not going to operate in settlements. And because their current distributor in Israel was not willing to agree to that condition, they will not be renewing their agreement with that distributor beyond the end of 2022. And to the extent that they continue to operate in Israel, they will ensure they do so without operating in the occupied Palestinian territory, which of course includes occupied East Jerusalem, which the Israeli government has annexed but remains occupied territory under international law and where the Israeli government every day routinely systematically is abusing the rights of Palestinians, and systematically oppressing them.
AMY GOODMAN: Omar Shakir, we want to thank you for being with us, Israel and Palestine Director of Human Rights Watch, speaking to us from Amman, Jordan. And Logan Bayroff, Vice President of Communications for J Street.
And more will come, inevitably.
Posts
