DECEMBER 2007

Please find enclosed the link to the UN Humanitarian Monitor, October 2007

http://www.ochaopt.org/documents
/Humanitarian_Monitor_Oct07.pdf

Shocking Litany of Events

1. Apartheid Masked: Third in a Series of Non Violent Protests Against
Apartheid Road 443
2. Znet: Israel’s Settlement Blocs Carve Up the West Bank
3. Qusin Olive Harvest 2007
4. Looting and burning in Nahr al Bared
5. Jalud Olive Harvest Stopped by Armed Settlers and the Israeli Army
6. Al-Haq: Open Letter to Quartet Members: Israel’s Recent Land
Confiscations East of Occupied Jerusalem
7. Palestine Chronicle: 90th Anniversary of the Balfour Declaration
8. Settlers burn olive trees in Jamma’in
9. Succesful demonstration and olive harvest in Um Salamona
10. IMEMC: Israeli soldiers exchange photos of killed Palestinians
11. Adbusters: Maxim’s Sex War
12. Ambulance stopped at checkpoint in Hebron
13. Bedouin Village facing demolition near Bir Nabala
14. 13 Palestinians arrested in Al-Mazra’a Al-Qibliya


1. Apartheid Masked: Third in a Series of Non Violent Protests Against
Apartheid Road 443

November 10th 2007

Yesterday saw the third in a series of non-violent protest against the Israeli system of Apartheid in the West Bank. 100 Palestinian, Israeli and internationals marched down to the side of Route 443 to convey the message of how Israel is denying Palestinians their rights to free movement within their own territory. They carried green Palestinian license plates with crosses made of Israeli and American flags over them to highlight how the Israeli system of apartheid has full American economic and political support.

The Israeli army attempted to stop the procession with force but the demonstrators managed to reach the side of the road and protest for about an hour, conveying their message to passing drivers. The army detained one Palestinian and one international, before releasing them towards the end of the demonstration.

The system of roads inside the West Bank that are inaccessible to Palestinians creates isolated enclaves, severely hampering the Palestinian economy, and affecting almost every aspect of Palestinian life.

Most apartheid Roads are for settlers and army use, Israelis inside Israel proper are sheltered from seeing the affects their governments actions have on Palestinian peoples lives. However, despite 9.5 km of road 443 passing through the West Bank, it is the main route between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. For seven years Palestinians have been banned from using the road, even though it is the only main road in the southern district of Ramallah, and its expansion was built on seized Palestinian land. The Road, together with the apartheid wall, create the enclaves of Bir Naballa and Biddu. The villages are completely surrounded by Israeli infrastructure and their inhabitants can only leave through underground tunnels to Ramallah.

--------------------
2) Znet: Israel’s Settlement Blocs Carve Up the West Bank

November 6th 2007

By Mohammed Khatib

For the people of our small village of Bil’in, which lies west of Ramallah in the occupied West Bank, the planned negotiations between Palestinian and Israeli leaders in Annapolis, Maryland evoke mixed feelings. Like all Palestinians, we pray that our children will not spend their lives as we did, under Israeli military occupation.

But our experience has been that Israel, the stronger party, exploits peace talks as a smokescreen to obscure facts that it is establishing on the ground. During the Oslo “peace” process Israel built settlements in the occupied territories at an unprecedented rate. Israel’s system of settler-only roads, which is now strangling our cities and villages, was created during the Oslo process. This makes us wary of the Annapolis negotiations.

Israel built settlements throughout the West Bank even though international law prohibits an occupying power from settling its population in occupied territory. Now Israel intends to annex most West Bank settlement blocs either through negotiated agreement with the Palestinians, or unilaterally.

Bil’in, like tens of West Bank villages, is losing vital land and resources to Israel’s settlement blocs. In 1991, Israel confiscated 200 acres of our village’s land and declared them state land. In 2001 private Israeli developers began building a new Jewish settlement there, as part of the Modi’in Illit settlement bloc.

In 2005 Israel’s apartheid wall separated Bil’in from 50% of our agricultural land. In response, we held over 100 nonviolent protests together with Israeli and international supporters. Hundreds of us were injured and arrested. After our protests and a legal appeal, Israel’s Supreme Court ruled last month that the wall’s route in Bil’in must be changed to return around half of our land that was taken.

Though we celebrated this success, Israel, with US backing, still plans to annex the Modi’in Illit settlement bloc which includes more of our land. Unlike the settlements initiated by the settler movements, the settlement blocs were built in strategic areas by the Israeli government under the Likud, Labor, and Kadima parties. The settlement blocs are designed to ensure Israeli control of our movement, borders, access to water and of Jerusalem, even following the creation of a “sovereign” Palestinian state.
Some Israeli politicians claim that the settlement blocs that Israel intends to annex comprise 5% of the West Bank. However, these politicians do not include the settlements in occupied East Jerusalem in their calculations because occupied East Jerusalem was unilaterally and illegally annexed by Israel in 1967.

But in reality, Israel has already de facto annexed the strategic 10.2% of the West Bank that lies between the Green Line and the apartheid wall, including the settlement blocs. About 80% of all Israeli settlers now reside west of the apartheid wall and inside the West Bank.

As Palestinians, we have expressed our willingness to live together on this land with the Jewish people, and to live in one democratic state with Jewish Israelis as equal citizens. However, most Jewish Israelis and their politicians have clearly stated that they must live in a Jewish state, not in a state for all of its citizens. For this reason, we agreed to live in two states- Palestine side by side with Israel.

For Palestinians, agreeing to live in a state on 22% of our historic homeland was a great compromise. But Yasser Arafat was besieged in his office by Israel because he didn’t accept Israel’s so-called “generous offer” at Camp David. He was punished because he would not surrender yet more land, and accept a state composed of isolated cantons carved up by Israel’s settlement blocs.

We take strength from our faith that no situation of injustice can continue forever. In the end we will all have to live on this land as equals. When that time finally comes we will discover that we are more similar than different. Until then, we will not accept shiny trinkets made of words like “state” and “sovereignty” when we know that within our “state” we will not be able to access our water, exit and enter freely, or move from one place to another without Israeli permission. I will not be free as long as Israel’s settlement blocs and wall steal and carve up my land and surround my capital, Jerusalem.

We have suffered too much for too long. We will not accept apartheid masked as peace. We will settle for no less than our freedom.

Mohammed Khatib is a leading member of Bil’in’s Popular Committee Against the Wall and the secretary of Bil’in’s Village Council.

--------------------
3. Qusin Olive Harvest 2007

November 5th 2007

During the week of October 20th, ISM volunteers worked with farmers to harvest olives in Qusin, a small village on the outskirts of the Palestinian city of Nablus in the central Northern region of the West Bank. Nablus had recently experienced an invasion by the Israeli occupation forces. During this invasion, there were a number of innocent Palestinian civilian casualties including a 70 year old man who was killed, a 7 year old girl was shot in the back with live ammunition but fortunately survived and a reporter was shot in the back 4 times by the Israeli Occupation Force (IOF) with plastic coated steel bullets, also surviving.

The village of Qusin had experienced IOF incursions as well. The village had staged a peaceful demonstration whereby the villagers of Qusin and international volunteers had marched from Qusin to Sarra, a nearby sister town to protest the erecting of a gate on the main road between the two villages that remained permanently closed. Shortly afterwards, in response to the demonstration, during the night of September 21, the Israeli army invaded Qusin. They invaded again on the night of September 23. Palestinian youths were taken away by the IOF–no information as to their whereabouts was given. They were detained for a day or two, and “beaten like donkeys” as one of the youths described their treatment.

Due to the ongoing harassment by the IOF, internationals were requested to assist with the olive harvest in Qusin in an attempt to reduce the possibility of conflict. When we arrived at the site of the olive trees to be harvested, it was pointed out to us that an Israeli chemical factory had recently been built adjacent to the Qusin olive groves. Detrimental to the Qusin farmers was not only the fact that the factory had been situated right next to their olive trees, but also that they are often no longer permitted access to harvest their trees due to Israeli “security issues” concerning the factory.

The factory was too toxic to be allowed to built in Israel proper, and was only operated at night. In the village of Qusin, the smell of the factory’s toxic fumes was very tangible. Its effect on the olive trees was noticeable as well. We were shown black spots on the olive leaves that had been caused by the factory emissions. We wondered how long the olive trees would last and what kind of effect the factory fumes would have on the Qusin inhabitants themselves. Clearly, the factory had deliberately been placed by the Israelis as a means of forcing the Palestinians from their lands.

Fortunately, there were no incidents with the IOF during the time we were there assisting with the harvest. We had the feeling that due to our presence, the Qusin Palestinians felt more secure in harvesting the olives that were accessible to them. The army had stayed away and, for the most part, the Qusin olives were harvested.

--------------------
4) Looting and burning in Nahr al Bared

November 5th 2007

In May 2007 Nahr al Bared Refugee Camp, home to over 30,000 Palestinian refugees, became the site of a 4-month battle between the Lebanese Army and extremist group Fatah al-Islam.

During this time over 40 civilians, 167 soldiers and over 200 Fatah al- Islam members were killed. 30,000 refugees were displaced.

>From the official end of the battle, in early September, until the 10th of October the camp was under exclusive Lebanese army control.

When parts of the new camp were re-opened and the first thousand families returned to Nahr al Bared, they returned to houses that had been burnt, looted and vandalised. Witnesses attest to what appears to be a systematic pattern of burning and looting. Racist graffiti written in many homes in the camp is signed with the names of various Lebanese Army Commando groups.

No military or independent investigation has been carried out, although Amnesty International has written to the Lebanese government, calling for an investigation to be initiated and those responsible to be held accountable.

Journalists and human rights organizations are being denied entry to the camp.

This short documentary deals with the looting and burning of Nahr al-
Bared Camp. All the footage was secretly filmed.

--------------------
5) Jalud Olive Harvest Stopped by Armed Settlers and the Israeli Army

November 4th 2007

The Ibrahim family of the West Bank village of Jalud, accompanied by international and Israeli Human Rights Workers (HRWs), were forcibly prevented from harvesting their land yesterday by both armed settlers
and the Israeli Army. Jalud, a community of about 500 people in the
district of Nablus, regularly faces harassment from nearby settlements
and settlement outposts. Of the 16,000 dunums that belonged to the
village, 10,000 dunums has been illegally confiscated for settlements
whilst another 2,000 has been declared a military closed zone.

At approximately 10 am, several dozens farmers, joined by around 20
international and Israeli HRWs, began to pick olives on village land
to the west of an outpost from Shilo settlement. Three Israeli
soldiers immediately came down from the outpost and ordered the
villagers to stop their harvest. The soldiers were quickly followed by
around 20 settlers, armed with handguns, machine guns and a large
attack dog, who attempted to steal the farmers’ equipment along with
the few olives that had already been picked.

One HRW saw a Palestinian woman roughly pushed by a settler, who then
proceeded to dump everything out of the bags she was carrying. Army
reinforcements soon arrived on the scene and aggressively forced the
farmers into a corner of the grove. At approximately 11.30am the army
threatened the farmers with teargas and rubber bullets, forcing the
party to leave with only one bag of olives picked. No attempts were
made by the army or police to remove the settlers from the land,
despite it being declared a Closed Military Zone.

The Ibrahim family have not been able to harvest their olives since
2004. Every year Fawzi Ibrahim has sent the land ownership documents
to the DCO for permission to work the land, but has received no
response. He estimates that the family loses roughly $40,000 a year in
olive oil production and another $50,000 in chick peas and wheat. He
is now forced to rely on his 2,000 NIS a month salary from his
teaching work in Hawara and can no longer afford the legal fees
required to fight for his land through the Israeli courts. The last
time he went to court over his land, when a settler from Shilo had
harvested $20,000 worth of his wheat, the court agreed that the land
was his and the settler had illegally harvested the wheat, but only
awarded Fawazi Ibrahim 80 NIS in compensation, whilst sentencing the
convicted settler to 140 hours community service to be completed
within the settlement.

--------------------
6) Al-Haq: Open Letter to Quartet Members: Israel’s Recent Land
Confiscations East of Occupied Jerusalem

November 4th 2007

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Dear Quartet Member,

As a Palestinian non-governmental organisation dedicated to the
protection and promotion of international human rights and
humanitarian law in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT), Al-Haq
is gravely concerned at the planned land confiscations in the vicinity
of East Jerusalem, and requests that the Quartet assert itself as a
relevant actor in defending the fundamental rights of the Palestinian
people.

On 24 September 2007 the Israeli military commander of the West Bank
signed a land expropriation order targeting occupied Palestinian land
to the east of Jerusalem, in the West Bank. The immediate aim of these
expropriations is to begin the construction of a road, for Palestinian
use, linking the southern, eastern and northern areas of the West Bank
at the expense of Palestinian property rights, territorial contiguity
and ultimately, self-determination.

According to the map attached to the military expropriation order, the
new road will circumvent the Israeli settlement of Ma’ale Adumim and
other adjacent settlements, and run near the southern and eastern edge
of the planned route of the Annexation Wall surrounding these
settlements. The recent confiscations cannot therefore be viewed in
isolation, but must be seen as forming an integral part of both the
Wall’s associated infrastructure and Israel’s territorial ambitions
around occupied East Jerusalem. Once constructed, the wall around the
‘Adumim bloc’ will enclose some 61 square kilometres of the occupied
West Bank, and jut across some 45 % of the width of the West Bank at
its narrowest point. Under a longstanding Israeli development plan,
the land between Ma’ale Adumim and occupied East Jerusalem, an area
referred to by the Israeli authorities as “E-1,” will be used for the
construction of some 3,500 Israeli housing units, driving a contiguous
wedge of illegal settlements and their associated infrastructure
through the centre of the West Bank. The primary road arteries used by
Palestinians to access East Jerusalem and to travel between the north,
south and east of the West Bank currently run in close proximity to
the “E-1? area. The recent confiscation of land and planned road
represent a clear intention to limit and prevent Palestinian access to
this area, further consolidating Israel’s control over East
Jerusalem’s immediate surroundings and fracturing the West Bank.

Land Confiscation

Israel, as the occupying power in the West Bank, including East
Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, is prohibited under international
humanitarian law from destroying private or public property unless
such destruction is “rendered absolutely necessary by military
operations.” Further, the “extensive destruction and appropriation of
property, not justified by military necessity and carried out
unlawfully and wantonly,” amounts to a ‘grave breach’ of the Fourth
Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in
Time of War (Fourth Geneva Convention)Fourth Geneva Convention,
entailing individual criminal responsibility for those committing,
ordering or knowingly allowing such a breach to be committed.

The requirement of ‘military necessity’ grants an occupying power
substantial discretion in determining a course of action. However,
this discretion is not unlimited. First, the action must serve a
military purpose. Second, military necessity cannot justify the
violation of other rules of international humanitarian law, and third,
the expected military advantage flowing from the action must not be
disproportionate to the harm caused to the civilian population.

As already noted, the planned road will provide an alternative to
Palestinian use of the road network in the “E-1? area. In combination
with access restrictions imposed by the route of the Wall and its
associated infrastructure, Palestinians travelling in the West Bank
will be forced around the Ma’ale Adumim settlement ‘bloc,’
facilitating the construction of further settlement infrastructure in
the E-1 area, including 3,500 new housing units. These intended
developments and the settlements already present stand in clear
violation of international humanitarian law. Article 49(6) of the
Fourth Geneva Convention states that an occupying power “shall not
deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the
territory it occupies.”

In addition, the fragmentation of the West Bank inherent in Israel’s
territorial ambitions, manifested clearly by Israel’s settlement
construction and land confiscation in and around East Jerusalem,
renders the meaningful exercise of the inalienable right of the
Palestinian people to right to self-determination impossible. As noted
by the UN Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in the
Palestinian territories occupied in 1967,

The right to self-determination is closely linked to the notion of
territorial sovereignty. A people can only exercise the right of self-
determination within a territory. The amputation of Palestinian
territory by the Wall seriously interferes with the right of self-
determination of the Palestinian people as it substantially reduces
the size of the self-determination unit (already small) within which
that right is to be exercised.

Israel has repeatedly stated its intention to retain control over the
most populous settlements in any future negotiated solution. This
would amount not only to a violation of the right to self-
determination as described above, but would also constitute the
annexation of territory by force, a practice absolutely prohibited
under contemporary international law.

Based on the above, it is clear that Israel cannot avail itself of
‘military necessity’ as a justification for its recent land
confiscation and planned destruction. The confiscation and destruction
of the land does not serve a military purpose, but rather is part and
parcel of Israel’s illegal settlement policy and the construction of
the Annexation Wall. The inherent and resulting denial of the right of
the Palestinian people to self-determination and the de facto
annexation of territory by force, causes massive and disproportionate
harm to the occupied civilian population. As such, the land
confiscation and planned road not only constitutes a violation of
international humanitarian law in its own right, but also serves to
entrench other egregious violations of international law.



International Legal Obligations

Under Article 1 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, the High Contracting
Parties “undertake to respect and to ensure respect for the present
Convention in all circumstances.” This requires that states must not
only avoid taking action that would contribute to or recognise
situations arising from the violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention,
but that they must also actively seek to bring violations committed by
other states to an end.

Further, under the terms of General Assembly resolution 2625 (XXV),

Every State has the duty to promote, through joint and separate
action, realization of the principle of equal rights and self-
determination of peoples, in accordance with the provisions of the
Charter, and to render assistance to the United Nations in carrying
out the responsibilities entrusted to it by the Charter

While not the object of specific international legal obligations the
Quartet must, if it is to serve any other purpose than providing tacit
consent to Israel’s violations of international law, explicitly affirm
fundamental international legal norms, including the right to self-
determination, the prohibition on the annexation of territory by force
and the illegality of Israel’s settlement policy. As an immediate
first step towards this, the Quartet should demand the immediate
cancellation to the most recent confiscation orders, the cessation of
all settlement construction and the construction of the Annexation
Wall in the OPT, and that these structures be dismantled. As already
recognised by the Quartet the settlements and Annexation Wall are
serious obstacles to achieving a just and durable peace.

Additionally, participation in the Quartet does not shield its members
from their individual international legal obligations. Al-Haq
therefore calls upon:

* The European Union to implement its own guidelines on promoting
compliance with international humanitarian law (2005/C 327/04),
including the imposition of sanctions and restrictive measures.

* The United Nations, and in particular Secretary General Ban Ki-moon,
to explicitly demand Israel’s compliance with fundamental principles
of the United Nations, in particular self-determination and the
prohibition on the annexation of territory by force.

* The United States and Russian Federation to uphold their obligations
under Article 1 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, and adopt immediate
and unflinching diplomatic and other measures to ensure Israel’s
compliance with the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Sincerely,

Shawan Jabarin
General Director

--------------------
7) Palestine Chronicle: 90th Anniversary of the Balfour Declaration

November 3rd 2007

By: J. A. Miller

It becomes, therefore, specially important to foster and develop any
strongly-marked Jewish movement which leads directly away from these
fatal [socialist] associations. And it is here that Zionism has such a
deep significance for the whole world at the present time….The
struggle which is now beginning between the Zionist and Bolshevik Jews
is little less than a struggle for the soul of the Jewish people. -
Winston Churchill, 1920

They own the [Holy] land, just the mere land, and that’s all they do
own; but it was our folks, our Jews and Christians, that made it holy,
and so they haven’t any business to be there defiling it. It’s a shame
and we ought not to stand it a minute. We ought to march against them
and take it away from them. - Mark Twain, Tom Sawyer Abroad, 1894

The Dual Purpose Declaration

Some time ago I attended a workshop on the Palestine conflict held in
a nearby Protestant church. You might know the sort of church; a
liberal American congregation with a majority of aging, white
parishioners who gamely troop off to construct community centers in
Central America or cluster bedraggled and clutching flickering candles
in ever-diminishing numbers at anti-war vigils.

For the opening act the organizers trundled out an employee from a
nearby institution of higher learning who delivered an Introduction to
the History of the Conflict in sepulchral tones. When he had done with
his twenty minutes of erudition, the professor smirked round at the
audience and opened the floor for questions. An elderly Palestinian
woman in the audience stood up with considerable dignity and asked why
he had dwelt on the secret Sykes-Picot agreement to divide imperial
Middle Eastern spoils between Britain and France but neglected any
mention of the Balfour Declaration which is regarded by Palestinians
as the founding document of the crime against them. His flustered
answer came apologetically vague but the damage had been done. The
timeline as delivered no doubt retained its Balfour-less authority
with the audience by virtue of the subtle relief provided by the
insinuation that at least Roman Catholics shared some of the blame.

Alas the good professor is not alone in regarding the Balfour
Declaration as insignificant. A majority of the learned interlocutors
of the “problem” tend to spin Balfour’s promise as deriving from the
exigencies of WWI or simply evidence of a pottering British
eccentricity. Imagine those silly Brits thinking they could give away
land not belonging to them: What a good joke! But by trivializing or
censoring Balfour yet another layer of cover to the illegality of
Israel is provided, a service long and eagerly rendered gratis by much
of western academia. It is instructive to note that the proclamation
establishing British Mandate rule in Palestine as ratified by the
League of Nations in 1922 included every single syllable of the
Balfour declaration and nary a one from Sykes-Picot.

We are now staring down the 91st year since Balfour put the West’s
larcenous intentions in writing. And although my local representative
of the American intelligentsia expunged Balfour from his narrative the
Arabs were perfectly aware from the outset that Bloody Balfour — as he
was known to the Irish who had felt the sting of his lash — was no
charming British lord but rather the author of a singular colonial
document of cold and malign intent. During Balfour’s 1925 tour of
Egypt , Palestine and Syria demonstrations, strikes and editorial
denunciation hounded him every step of the way and after spending only
a single day in Damascus in which he dared not to leave his hotel room
his Lordship was bundled hastily and in secret out of town ahead of a
furious citizenry.[1]

The timing of his declaration on November 2, 1917 — those early heady
days of the Russian Revolution — indicates Balfour certainly had red
reduction on his mind. Indeed, Zionists both Christian and Jewish had
long flogged their ideology as a remedy for the disturbing Jewish
affinity for socialism. As Herzl made the rounds in Europe searching
for a patron he not only adopted the anti-Semitic line that the Jews
were the “problem” but eagerly offered up Zionism as the solution
explaining as he did to anyone who would listen “that we were taking
the Jews away from the revolutionary parties”.[2]

Marketing their ideology as revolution lite the early Zionists
engineered an ingenious bait-and-switch operation by veiling its
messianic/imperialist impetus behind the veneer of a faux secularist
labor movement in order to co-opt and divert Jewish revolutionary
energies while simultaneously pandering to the anti-Semites. In
Palestine the relentless squeezing out of any residual impulse for
worker solidarity was embodied in the ominous Zionist slogan “the
conquest of labor” which perfectly complemented the equally violent
and exclusionary goal of land “redemption”.

Not long after the Balfour declaration was promulgated, that well-
known warlord Winston Churchill put it rather more plainly in the
Sunday Herald opinion piece quoted above which article was accompanied
by a grainy photo of a morose and bejowled Churchill inspecting the
4th Hussars at Aldershot.[3] Although Balfour rushed the declaration
into print just as the Russian revolution was triumphing, the colonies
were never far from his sights. In addition to undercutting socialism
Balfour hoped to insert a reliable settler European base in Palestine
thereby taking up Herzl on his offer of Jewish readiness to “form a
part of a wall of defense for Europe in Asia, an outpost of
civilization against barbarism”. [4] Thus it was that Herzl first
introduced the wall motif which was to become so integral to Zionism,
a motif later expanded ferrously and ferociously by Jabotinsky and
ultimately made tangible in the concrete monstrosity now strangling
Palestine.

At the same time Churchill was professing concern for Jewish souls he
was busily extinguishing Muslim ones as he presided over the very
first aerial bombardment of a colonial rebellion in his role as
titular head of the newly-minted Ministry of Air and War. The
resistance subjected to this first test of airpower’s efficacy was led
by the Somali poet-warrior and dervish commander Muhammad Ibn
‘Abdallah Hassan a.k.a. the “Mad Mullah” regarded by the British in
those days in much the same manner Americans regard Hassan Nasrallah
or Muqtada Sadr today. The Mullah had inflicted a humiliating defeat
on the British at Dulmadoba in eastern Somalia in 1913 in which the
British commander was killed. Hassan impudently memorialized the event
in a poem entitled “The Death of Richard Corfield”:

O Corfield! You are a traveler who
Will not stay long here below
You will follow the path where there is no rest
You are among the denizens of Hell

After twenty years of resistance however, Hassan’s lightly-armed
forces proved no match for airpower even in its nascent form. A lethal
combination of British aerial bombardment and smallpox decimated the
Somali resistance by 1920. As one of the pilots who flew in
imperialism’s maiden bombing run laconically observed, the airplane
was a “convenient weapon to bomb the old villain out of hiding place”.
[5] The Somali experiment was so murderously successful that an
enthusiastic Churchill advocated that using airpower to subdue
rebellion in a newly conquered Iraq arguing that it would allow a
cutback British ground troops by more than 80%. Spurred by Churchill’s
cost-effectiveness analysis, an RAF air campaign was launched and 97
tons of bombs were dropped killing 9,000 Iraqis.[6]. The airborne
spirit of Churchill today animates the vicious American and Zionist
air campaigns in Iraq , Palestine and Lebanon . Although nearly a
century apart, in each instance the goal was to remotely impose
destruction, misery and discipline upon an obstreperous Islam.

I am Cyrus! I am Cyrus!

Balfour’s two-pronged imperial goal of crushing impetus for social and
economic equity from within and bludgeoning indigenous resistance in
the colonies succeeded even beyond his Lordship’s wildest dreams. The
spectacular and continuous success of his Declaration is due, I
submit, to the innovation contained within it, one which has
immeasurably enhanced its lethality and indeed ensured its longevity
in spite of all odds. And that innovation is the introduction of Old
Testamentary religion as justification for the crimes under
consideration.

Each year that has passed since that dark November day in 1917 has
seen the minor and crack-brained ideology of Zionism — with only a few
million official adherents worldwide –going from strength to strength
while other ideologies with millions more followers have withered and
died leaving not a wrack behind. This persistence of Zionism in spite
of its brutal racism has puzzled many. In addition to a near universal
tolerance of its crimes from a plurality of Western governments
Zionism has also enjoyed almost complete immunity from effective
assault by the left. The continued silence of western progressives in
the face of the Iraq and Lebanon wars – let alone the eighty-year war
in Palestine – are I submit directly related to Old Testament-based
religious Zionism that originated not with Theodore Herzel in 1896 but
in Protestant Europe centuries ago.

Like the Balfourian template, Zionism’s success can be attributed not
only to its proven abilities in combating secularism and social/racial/
economic equity that it has executed with a single-minded dedication
as it assisted the West in its domination of the Muslim – or in the
case of Apartheid South Africa – the African Other. The other less
understood but even more powerful component of Zionism’s staying power
derives from the ideology’s entirely Christian origins, a subject on
which I have expanded in some detail elsewhere.[7] Anyone who has
labored in western progressive and antiwar movements has met the
endemic reflexive gatekeeping by the membership on behalf of Israel’s
crimes. Such near formulaic reflexivity derives, I believe, directly
from a long, historic Protestant regard of Palestine as covenanted
property owned not only by Jews but also by Protestants as well. And
here I am not speaking about the easily identified and excoriated
rapturist/dispensationalist crowd but rather what Hilton Oberzinger
has identified as the less understood and therefore entirely
unexamined Zionist ideological current that

…goes far beyond the narrower terrain of Likud politicians and
conservative televangelists, an affiliation that involves broader,
more liberal trends within Protestantism and Zionism, as well as more
secular currents within Western nationalist discourse. [8]

Although Zionism’s zealousness in furthering the forces of reaction is
unexcelled, the left has been unable to combat it precisely because of
these origins and the deeply ingrained, almost subconscious belief
held by many in the west — avowed atheists included — that Palestine
is somehow legal property of both Jews and Christians. Martin Buber,
so admired by many on the left, minced no words in this regard: “Where
a command and a faith are present, in certain historical situations
conquest need not be robbery.” [9] Zionism’s vigor has been ensured by
this very fusion of larceny and religion. As the end-product of a
country that produced the world’s original Christian Zionists in the
17th century, Balfour finally succeeded in turning religious formula
into official imperial policy.

Hundreds of years of Old Testament theological education overlays
nearly all of western Christianity and its influence in enabling
Israel to continue in its death’s head trajectory must not be
underestimated. Mark Twain understood this dynamic and succinctly sums
it up in Tom Sawyer Abroad when he has Tom — exasperated by Huck’s
inability to grasp the concept of land theft in the name of religion —
state loftily: “[You can’t] try to reason out a thing that’s pure
theology by the laws that protect real estate”! Indeed you cannot as
Bill Clinton would agree. The ex-President pulled an all-nighter on
Sept. 12, 1993, poring over the retributive and genocidal Book of
Joshua in preparation for his speech on the occasion of the “historic”
Rabin-Arafat handshake. [10] Like a pair of sanctimonious parsons,
both Rabin and Clinton quoted the Bible at Arafat in their respective
speeches the next day, putting the Palestinians on notice yet again
that not only would they never relinquish joint Jewish/Protestant
covenantal claim of their ownership stake in Palestinian real estate
but moreover that they had in hand the Biblical paperwork to back it
up.

The egoism and violence engendered by using Old Testamentary
justification for crime cannot be underestimated. Perhaps the finest
example of this particular sort of madness was exhibited by none other
than Harry Truman who in 1953 was introduced at the Jewish Theological
Seminary in New York as the “man who helped create the state of Israel
”. In as splendid a display of egomania suffused with biblical
intoxication you could ever wish to see, an indignant Truman is
reported to have shouted, “What do you mean ‘helped create’? I am
Cyrus! I am Cyrus!” [11] As a beneficiary of an English public school
education steeped in biblical and ancient history no doubt Balfour
fantasized himself in much the same role – or perchance in one even
more Exalted — as he penned his declaration that has in keeping with
its author’s nickname spilled so much blood for so long.

Notes:

1. al-Ahram Weekly Online, A Balfour Curse, October 26 – November 1,
2000.
2. See Chapter 1 of Lenni Brenner’s excellent Zionism in the Age of
Dictators, 1983
3. Illustrated Sunday Herald, February 8, 1920, p. 5
4. Theodore Herzl, The Jewish State, 1896. Ever eager to portray
Zionists “pioneers” as naïve idealists, neo-Zionist Uri Avnery insists
that Herzl was merely thinking of a “metaphoric wall” in The Mother of
all Pretexts, Counterpunch, October 16, 2007
5. Said Samatar, Sarbeeb:The Art of Oblique Communication in Somali
Culture, June 2005
6. Jonathan Glancey, Our Last Occupation, The Guardian, April 2003
7. J.A. Miller, Madness and Monotheism, State of Nature , Spring 2006;
Home Court Advantage, Dissident Voice, August 3, 2006
8. Hilton Oberzinger, In the Shadow of “God’s Sun-Dial”: The
Construction of American Christian Zionism and the Blackstone
Memorial. SEHR, Vol. 5, Issue 1
9. Martin Buber, On Zion:The History of an Idea, 1974, p. 146
10. Michael Prior. The Bible and Colonialism, 1997, p.40
11. Moshe Davis, With Eyes on Zion , 1977, p. 25
--------------------
8) Settlers burn olive trees in Jamma’in

November 3rd 2007

The West Bank village of Jamma’in has 10 000 residents, most of them
farmers, and is close to the biggest illegal settlement in the west
bank, Ariel, and another smaller one, Tapua. Often the villagers are
harassed by settlers, most recently a few days ago when an old man was
mugged whilst harvesting his olive field. Two weeks ago settlers also
burnt down 50-60 olive trees and refused the fire brigade access to
the site of the fire, ensuring the entire field was burnt. The army
and settlers also regularly prevent farmers planting new trees on
their land.

Last year the villagers from Jamma’in, with the assistance of
internationals, built a simple stone road to get a better access to
their olive field. Before long the army installed a roadblock
rendering it inaccessible by motor vehicle.

Israeli military invasions are frequent in the village, often it is
alleged that the village is harboring terrorists or one of its
residents has attacked a settler. A few days ago a settler from Ariel
was actually shot, and although the attacker’s origin is unknown, the
army blocked the road connecting Jamma’in with the main road, forcing
the villagers to travel extensive distances to reach the village. This
is an example of collective punishment, which is illegal under the
Geneva Convention, but all too frequent in West Bank and Gaza.

A fence separates the village from the main road. In no way does it
provide any extra security to either of the settlements but merely
serves to impede villagers access to their fields.

The population of Jamma’in is growing. Opportunities to build new
houses, however, are extremely limited as building is only allowed in
area A, and the village is closely bound by area B. House demolitions
are frequent along the area A/B boundary, worsening the housing crisis
and devastating families. Class sizes in the village school now exceed
50 children in one small room as the school building has no room to
expand.

In contrast, Ariel is expanding. Currently there is only a fence along
the proposed route of the apartheid wall and it is feared that the
route of the wall will be diverted upon completion to annex the
villages water source. The annexation of Palestinian water sources by
the apartheid wall is an under-reported but integral aspect to the
occupation. This process, along with the incursions into the West Bank
the wall makes around Salfit and Jerusalem, greatly undermines the
chance of setting up of a viable Palestinian state.

Ten years ago the villagers set up a women's center, staffed by local
volunteers. Activities include coaching children through their exams
and helping them with any problems they may have at school. They also
have a library and are going to give several workshops, including
computer lessens. Another initiative is a campaign against violence
towards women, the center organises demonstrations and actions to
raise public awareness of this issue. They are looking for other
women's organisations around the world to work with, if you are
involved with one and are interested in becoming a partner
organisation to the Jamma’in women's center the e-mail addres is:
neevein@yahoo.com

--------------------
9) Succesful demonstration and olive harvest in Um Salamona

November 3rd 2007

Today, the villagers of Um Salamona called for a demonstration that
would assist Mahmoud Takadka, in harvesting his olive trees on his
land, located just below the illegal Israeli settlement of Efrat. The
villagers of Um Salamona have had difficulties getting to their land
because the Israeli army has prevented them from crossing Road 60, the
construction site of the Apartheid Wall. Under the current Israeli
plan, the Apartheid Wall will separate approximately 3,000,000 square
meters of Um Salamona’s land from its Palestinian owners, destroying
thousands of grape and olive trees that are vital to the livelihood of
the local farmers. This is a violation of a recent Israeli High Court
ruling, which confirmed that the land is Palestinian-owned.

Early this morning, the farmer and his family tried to get to his
land, but the Israeli Army denied them access. Instead, the farmer
started harvesting on his fields close to the school, and waited for
human rights activists to arrive.

At about eleven o’clock, dozens of Palestinian, Israeli, and
international activists joined the farmer and his family in a new
attempt to get through to the land. The demonstration went across the
route of the wall, continued a few hundred metres and was then stopped
by the army. The activists and farmers went peacefully through a razor-
wired fence on the side of the road and managed to continue on to the
fields. There, the activists and the farmer successfully harvested all
of his olive trees. After finishing about three hours later, everyone
went peacefully back to the village. No one was injured.

--------------------
10) IMEMC: Israeli soldiers exchange photos of killed Palestinians

November 3rd 2007

Israeli soldiers have recently exchanged photos of killed Palestinians
on their cellular phones, the Israeli Daily Mariv reported on
Thursday.

The daily explained that the soldiers have set photos of killed
Palestinians as their mobiles’ screen pictures instead of their
families’.

The daily received a number of photos of those being exchanged by the
soldiers and that some soldiers revealed that such photos have
recently spread widely among soldiers, serving on Gaza-Israel border
lines.’

The Israeli newspaper maintained that most categories of the Israeli
army, including the tank battalions, the infantry and others have been
using these photos, the latest of which was of a Palestinian who was
killed by the Israeli soldiers during an infiltration attempt.

“The photos exchange has become a hobby among the soldiers, in way
that would have relieved us as victorious against the terrorists
‘Palestinians’”, the newspaper quoted one of the soldiers as saying.

A spokesperson of the Israeli army has responded to such a report by
saying that the army will start an examination into the case and that
if it proved correct, the army would guarantee morals of its soldiers.

Throughout the Palestinian uprising (Intifada), the Israeli army has
been involved in a series of misconduct, such as the killing of a four-
month-old Palestinian baby in southern Gaza, and the dragging in the
street of a killed Palestinian in the West Bank.

--------------------
11) Adbusters: Maxim’s Sex War

November 3rd 2007

By: Sean Condon

With photos of women in black bikinis striking provocative poses,
Maxim magazine devoted five full pages in their July 2007 issue to
answer the single most pressing question in the Middle East: “Are the
women in the Israeli Defense Forces the world’s sexiest soldiers?”

Commended for their ability to “take apart an Uzi in seconds,” Maxim
featured four “drop dead gorgeous” former Israeli soldiers scantily
clad in military garb and swimwear.

“My job was top secret,” said Nivit Bash, who wore a black army cap
and not much else for her picture. “I can’t talk about it other than
to say I studied some Arabic.”

What also wasn’t talked about was that the feature was actually part
of a branding campaign by the Consulate General of Israel in New York
to improve Israel’s public image. The consulate apparently believed
that using women in Maxim would make
readers forget Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine and use of
hundreds of thousands of cluster bombs in Lebanon in the conflict last
summer. It was Maxim’s decision to use the ex-soldiers, whose photo
shoot was partly funded by the American-Israel Friendship League and
Israel21C.

While some female members of the Israeli parliament denounced the
feature as “pornographic,” there was little outcry about the
magazine’s decision to promote and celebrate an army that has been
accused of war crimes by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch.

“When people view Israel, for the most part they view it as a land of
conflict anyway,” says David Saranga, a spokesperson for the
consulate. “Maxim knows what its readers like, and they wanted to
stylize it as girls of the IDF. Look, we’re a democracy, we’re a free
society, we invited them to do something in Israel and they chose what
to do.”

Maxim refused an interview request and only issued a brief statement
saying it was “pleased” with its work.

--------------------
12) Ambulance stopped at checkpoint in Hebron

30th October 2007

Today in the old city of Hebron, an ambulance carrying a Palestinian
woman to her home was delayed by Israeli soldiers for two hours at the
entrance to the Israeli occupied area of Beit Romano.

Traveling from Jerusalem following intensive surgery, the woman, Ms.
Abuhaikal from Tel Rumeida, was forced to wait in the ambulance for a
further two hours – unable to walk with 39 stitches in her abdomen –
as Israeli soldiers denied the ambulance entry to the occupied area.
The ambulance was forced to drive through the occupied zone to reach
her residence, as Tel Rumeida is blocked to Palestinian cars with
concrete road blocks – the only entries being for Israeli settlers
through Israeli occupied zones.

The Israeli soldiers refused to allow the ambulance entry to the
occupied zone, despite the fact that the transit had been arranged
with Israeli authorities many hours before. After waiting an initial
hour, the ambulance turned around, to take Ms. Abuhaikal back to
hospital, fearing for her health.

A collaboration of Israeli activists, International Red Cross and
international Human Rights Observers worked together to call the
ambulance back, convinced they could arrange for it to pass through.
After being forced to wait a further 45 minutes, the ambulance was
finally allowed to pass through the occupied zone, bringing Ms.
Abuhaikal to her home.

Throughout this travesty, there were other accidents in the area of
Hebron where ambulances were needed, but none of the ten Hebron
ambulances were available to attend.

Red Crescent ambulance drivers noted that this was an extremely common
occurrence, and that they are often forced to wait for 90 minutes to
get through checkpoints, both fixed and those known as “flying
checkpoints” – where Israeli soldiers can randomly decide to stop
vehicles for “security reasons”. One ambulance driver explained that
whilst driving an ambulance in the Hebron area he was once detained
for 3 hours for a security check, actions that clearly endanger
Palestinian lives. As the driver commented, “Palestinian lives are
cheap”.

--------------------
13) Bedouin Village facing demolition near Bir Nabala

October 30th 2007

In September this year, a village north of Jerusalem was divided in
two when the Israeli government completed another section of the
Apartheid Wall. The Israeli government intends to destroy the greater
part of the village, which lies to the east of the wall in territory
officially recognized by Israel as part of the Jerusalem municipality,
to build housing, industry and transport facilities. The Apartheid
Wall has separated the village members, leaving 45 people on land
claimed by Israel and 18 on the other side in Palestinian territory
near the village of Bir Nabala.

The villagers to the east of the Wall no longer have direct access to
water and electricity. Their only source of water is a plastic hose
that runs under the Wall, and they must call family members on the
other side of the wall to turn the water supply on and off. Villagers
have also lost access to grazing land for their livestock and pay 300
shekels for transport to retrieve feed from the land they once farmed.
The completion of the wall has also prevented villagers from taking
livestock to markets in the West Bank and the Ministry of Agriculture
consistently denies permits allowing villagers’ access to the West
Bank.

The 14 children in the village who used to walk to school must now
travel approximately two hours each day to and from school. The
children pass through Qalandyia checkpoint to Ramallah and then take
another bus to Bir Nabala. This journey is expensive, costing 15
shekels per child, which the villagers struggle to pay. Due to the
expense, ten children from east of the wall are living with members of
the village on the other side near Bir Nabala.

As the final sections of the wall were being put in place in
September, the movement of villagers was restricted by army for ten
days. During this period children were unable to attend school and
villagers had limited access to food and other necessities. On the
16th of September, members of the village separated by the wall
attempted to bring livestock feed to fellow villagers east of the wall
via the remaining small gap. The soldiers guarding this opening
prevented the animal feed from being brought across and called four
army jeeps to the scene to punish villagers.

Twenty soldiers entered the houses of the village members east of the
wall, who were to receive the livestock feed, and attacked the
villagers. A nineteen year old man and his uncle were taken to
hospital once villagers had negotiated for an hour with authorities to
allow an ambulance to arrive.

On the 25th of November a lawyer will defend the villagers before a
civil court in Jerusalem. Meanwhile, they struggle both to maintain
their daily routine as well as to prepare themselves for the legal
battle ahead. Members of the village make daily phone calls to NGO’s
such as B’Tselem to help them deal with issues such as soldiers at
Qalandia checkpoint. They have also made numerous calls to the
Palestinian Authority for assistance, but their requests can’t be
fulfilled due to the PA’s inability to operate on land claimed by the
Israeli authorities.

When asked what the Israeli government intended to do with the
villagers after demolition of their homes, the villagers’ spokesman
did not have a clear idea. “If we go now, I do not know where we will
go,” he told us. “In ’48 we lived in Beir Sheba. As a result of the
Nakbah we were forced to move. In 1962 we came to this area and have
lived here ever since. I was a 1 year old boy then and have lived on
this land ever since. This land belongs to East Jerusalem, we are on
Arab land” he added.

--------------------
14) 13 Palestinians arrested in Al-Mazra’a Al-Qibliya

** Update **
On October 31st, the Israeli army invaded Al-Mazra’a Al-Qibliya and
arrested eight more people. It seems they are to be charged with
exactly the same crimes the three British women formerly imprisoned
were charged with. Those allegations proved to be false and the women
released. More information will come as it is known.

October 27th 2007

Last night between 1am and 3am the Israeli army raided the West bank
towns of Abu Shukheidim and Al-Mazra’a Al-Qibliya arresting 13
Palestinians on allegations of criminal damage and being at an illegal
demonstration, they are now in Binyamin police station. In what is
clearly collective punishment, the arrested include the head of the Al-
Mazra’a Al-Qibliya council, a village council member and three minors.
The raids follow a demonstration on Friday against the illegal
annexation of agricultural lands by settlers.

The villages are surrounded by a group of settlements collectively
known as Talmund B, who have illegally confiscated 14,000 dunums of
Palestinian land for agricultural purposes, including 500 dunums in
the last three months. Despite local Palestinians contesting the
confiscation in court, the settlers have been planting grape trees in
a bid to claim the land through facts on the ground.

An armed settler disturbed a protest against the land confiscation in
August and settler harassment continued at Friday’s protest. Live
ammunition was used by settlers against the non-violent demonstration.
Two nights ago 30 to 40 adult settlers threw rocks at the village for
about an hour, breaking a solar panel in the process. Last night’s
arrests show how the army has chosen to ignore settler violence while
collectively punishing local Palestinians for exercising their right
to protest the confiscation of their property.

The arrests come the day after the release of three female British
peace activists, aged 45, 60 and 62, who were held by the Israeli
police on false charges of criminal damage after being present at the
demonstrations on Friday . Israeli police attempted to deport them,
and sent all three to the Ministry of the Interior where their case
was thrown out.

While the three British women were released due to the false nature of
the allegations, it is feared the prejudice inherent in the Israeli
court system will ensure the Palestinians face jail time and fines,
even if the allegations prove to be false.

International Solidarity Movement