Em 2008/09, Israel massacra Gaza e Obama defende o indefensável
Porém, Barack Obama, no tocante à questão Palestina, foi uma decepção nos dois mandatos. Netanyahu o humilhou, publicamente, várias vezes, de diversas maneiras. Humilhações acintosas que levam a conjeturas se o Presidente dos Estados Unidos um dia ousará deixar de ser subserviente à AIPAC e dar o grito de independência do afilhado criminoso que o enlameia e puxa para baixo.
Desta vez, pensava-se que a ida de Netanyahu aos EUA sem consultar Washington fosse o limite para que o presidente democrata que ele esbofeteava dissesse Basta! Mas não. A AIPAC e seus milhões falaram mais alto do que a noção de ombridade, que, na política gringa, é do domínio da metafísica e não do concretismo, e a Casa Branca curvou-se de novo ao Primeiro Ministro israelense que mente, mata, mente, mata, em uma cadeia de eventos que só Israel já protagonizou na História. Um espanto!
Aí Barack Obama engole em seco, põe a máscara de político fisiológico e declama como papagaio as diretivas do Israel Project (blog 08/08/14) sem pestanejar.
Pergunto-me o que Obama faria se recebesse um tapa (concreto) em sua cara lavada em vez das inúmeras bofetadas diplomática. Reagiria ou engoliria mais este sapo como se fosse caviar? Quanto o sapo teria de engordar para Obama entalar e cuspi-lo fora como o bicho asqueroso que é e que sufoca?
Cada vez que espero que o presidente Obama honre o candidato do "Yes, we can" ele dá pra trás. Estou perdendo a esperança de Barack Obama "man up" e de John Kerry (que também não aguenta ver Netanyahu nem pintado de ouro) deixarem a conversa fiada de lado e fazerem a coisa certa: deixar a ONU agir em vez de denegrir as nações que a compõem por reconhecerem o Rogue State of Israel como ele é, sem maquiagem de cumplicidade, em suas ações criminosas.
O discurso de Netanyahu no Congresso é sem comentário da minha parte porque nada do que sai da boca desse cara merece crédito e dar-lhe espaço é dar-lhe cartaz.
Obama says Netanyahu's speech on Iran is a mistake, but, once again,
bend his knees to Israel
bend his knees to Israel
and deceive about closing an unlikely deal
O Brasil é muito mais antigo do que Israel.
Israel é um país jovem, sem tradição político-socio-cultural e sem tradição democrática, já que começou e continuou como um Estado militarizado. Adotou o capitalismo democrático como sistema político que os governos sionistas controlam com o pulso forte de nossos generais nas ditaduras extintas na América Latina.
O Irã de hoje é dominado por retrógrados religiosos, mas cultos. A Pérsia é mais antiga do que Roma e sua cultura rivaliza com a greco-latina que herdamos. Sua tradição humanista jamais permitiria um genocídio.
Israel é uma torre de Babel populada por uma minoria mínima nascida na Palestina, de uma geração israelense filha de imigrantes e destes poucos nativos, e de um monte de imigrantes recentes de origens e culturas diversas que falam hebraico com sotaque de suas línguas de origem. Cultura única não existe. A importada se impõe e a influência dos Estados Unidos predomina.
Israel possui bomba atômica desde a década de 70. Ainda não a explodiu na Palestina porque se contaminaria.
Se Israel, que está acostumado a praticar campanhas de assassinatos, ocupação bárbara, limpeza étnica e massacres impunemente, ainda não usou seu arsenal nuclear, por que achar que o Irã, que não tem tradição expansionista nem intolerância étnico-religiosa, usaria? Sobretudo sabendo que a bomba atingiria os libaneses, os jordanianos e os palestinos?
Uma bomba atômica no Irã talvez levasse Israel a comedimento. Não é justo que Israel, um país fora-da-lei assumido, tenha o direito de possuir bomba atômica e negue esse direito aos vizinhos.
Uma bomba atômica no Irã geraria um equilíbrio bem-vindo à região.
Embora o ideal fosse desmantelar o arsenal nuclear de todos os países. Mas isto é utopia.
Netanyahu apela à ignorância na ONU
They'll be telling their legislators to defy Obama and move forward with another round of sanctions against Iran if the current negotiations collapse by the March 24 deadline.
Obama has already warned that he would veto those sanctions because they would only drive Iran to abandon the talks and risk accelerating its nuclear programme.
Netanyahu made no mention of the sanctions in his Monday remarks to AIPAC, one of Washington's most powerful pressure groups.
Instead he sought to shore up the rift his Capitol speech has driven with the White House.
Republicans invited Netanyahu to speak without consulting Obama, who will not meet Netanyahu while about 30 Democratic congressmen, six of them Jewish, plan to stay away from the Capitol speech in loyalty to the president.
Before Netanyahu spoke to AIPAC, US ambassador to the UN Samantha Power assured the crowd that under no circumstances would Iran be allowed to build a nuclear weapon.
But Netanyahu wants assurances that Iran's very capacity to develop a nuclear bomb will be prevented". Tom Ackerman, Al Jazeera
"AIPAC and other Jewish organizations have worked for generations to secure the support of both American parties and practically all senators and congress(wo)men. For years now, no politician on Capitol Hill dared to criticize Israel. It was tantamount to political suicide. The few who tried were cast into the wilderness.
And here comes Netanyahu and destroys all of this edifice for one election spectacle. He has declared war on the Democratic Party, cutting the bond that has connected Jews with this party for more than a century. Destroying the bipartisan support. Allowing Democratic politicians for the first time to criticize Israel. Breaking a generations-old taboo that may not be restored.
President Obama, who is being insulted, humiliated and obstructed in his most cherished policy move, the agreement with Iran, would be superhuman if he did not brood on revenge. Even a movement of his little finger could hurt Israel grievously.
Does Netanyahu care? Of course he cares. But he cares more about his reelection.
Much, much more". Uri Avnery.
Em Tel Aviv, protestos anti-Netanyahu / pró-União Sionista
Inside Story: Israel Election, A time for change?
And here comes Netanyahu and destroys all of this edifice for one election spectacle. He has declared war on the Democratic Party, cutting the bond that has connected Jews with this party for more than a century. Destroying the bipartisan support. Allowing Democratic politicians for the first time to criticize Israel. Breaking a generations-old taboo that may not be restored.
President Obama, who is being insulted, humiliated and obstructed in his most cherished policy move, the agreement with Iran, would be superhuman if he did not brood on revenge. Even a movement of his little finger could hurt Israel grievously.
Does Netanyahu care? Of course he cares. But he cares more about his reelection.
Much, much more". Uri Avnery.
Oslo Accords : Patchwork of Palestine
Palestine's Stolen Land
"Demolition and eviction notices are being served everyday.
Land seizure is a daily occurrence her."
Aref Dargmeh, head of Al-Maleh village council.
Land seizure is a daily occurrence her."
Aref Dargmeh, head of Al-Maleh village council.
E esqueceu de mencionar que se Israel se retirasse totalmente da Cisjordânia - militares e colônias; se Israel libertasse o presídio Gaza; se Israel respeitasse as leis internacionais e reconhecesse a Palestina nas fronteiras de 1967; se Israel devolvesse ao Líbano as Fazendas de Sheeba, se Israel devolvesse os Golã à Síria; trocando em miúdos, se Israel quisesse paz em vez de guerra, petróleo libanês e palestino, limpeza étnica e expansão territorial, duvido que o Irã pensasse em desejar-lhe mal. Judeus convivem com muçulmanos no Irã sem atrito; o que no "Estado Judeu" é impensável, vide a discriminação e os maltratos que os palestinos-israelenses cristãos e muçulmanos sofrem no quotidiano.
Os iranianos não inorantes nem bestas selvagens. Teerã é uma cidade culta. E quanto ao regime autoritário, os últimos governantes de Israel vêm caminhando a passos largos para rivalizar-se com os aiatolás; e Israel tem várias bombas atômicas. Para Netanyahu, ou seu eventual sucessor, começar a prender ativistas e oponentes é questão de tempo. Quem tem telhado de vidro...
"Opposing Iran nuclear deal, Israel's goal is not survival -
It's regional dominance"
It's regional dominance"
Como dizem os russos, enquanto EUA/Israel devaneiam, o Irã prossegue seu programa nuclear paulatinamente. Merece a alcunha de terrorista só por querer ter uma arma que vários países têm?
Terrorista é Israel que há décadas aterroriza e extermina uma população estrangeira inteira.
Na verdade, o sonho de Israel é ser os EUA no Oriente Médio inteiro. Bomba atômica, só as dele. Os demais países que ajoelhem e reconheçam a superioridade israelita! ouve-se na Jerusalém ocupada cada vez menos off the record. O fascismo está à espreita.
Marwan Bishara, da Al-Jazeera, analisa o discurso de Netanyahu na ONU
A segunda notícia, na Faixa de Gaza, passou desapercebida na grande-mídia, embora envolvesse milhares mais de pessoas, homens, mulheres, meninos, que saíram às ruas de suas cidades destroçadas para protestar contra outro crime, menos visível. A decisão do ditador do Egito Abdel Fattah el-Sissi de estender a etiqueta de terrorista, que já colara na ala militar do Hamas (Brigadas al-Qassam) à ala política do partido mais votado nas últimas eleições palestinas, em 2006 - desde então, a "comunidade internacional" desautorizou novas eleições por temer que Mahmoud Abbas não seja reeleito.
Desde que sequestrou a revolução egípcia, o general Sissi tem cometido crime atrás de crime para manter-se no trono que usurpou do povo, e deslizes, para atender às demandas de Israel e dos Estados Unidos.
Desta vez foi longe demais ao colar no Hamas uma etiqueta improcedente que é uma faca de dois gumes. Cometeu um erro que pode custar caro a seus cúmplices. O Hamas já está penando para evitar que a juventude gazauí, martirizada por bombardeios constantes, não se radicalize. Estes jovens que cresceram vendo suas cidades serem destruídas e familiares, amigos, colegas, serem três vezes desmembrados por bombas ou padecerem com deficiências física e morte lenta causada pelas armas químicas que choveram em suas cabeças, estão cansados da impotência do Hamas, da Autoridade Nacional Palestina, da impunidade de Israel, da apatia internacional, e procuram um meio de sair desta espiral infernal. Está faltando pouco para que comecem a pensar em alternativas mais radicais do que a oferecida pela Hamas que não consegue defender seu presente quem dirá um futuro livre e decente.
O Egito é o quarto país a registrar o Hamas em sua lista de organizações terroristas. Os outros três são Israel, EUA, Canadá (cujo Primeiro Ministro lucra com o sionismo). Diga-me com quem andas... Esta decisão foi mal-recebida no mundo árabe e na Palestina então, nem falar.
Falando em Obama acima, eis Abby Martin Breaking his double-speach
Gazauís protestam contra a etiqueta de terrorista
Além da cadeia de protestos populares na Faixa de Gaza, o porta-voz do Hamas denunciou esta decisão como "a desperate attempt to export Egypt's crisis. The decision is shocking, critical and targets the Palestinian people and Palestinian resistance forces."
Suas palavras encontraram eco na Cisjordânia, onde o parlamentar independente Mustafa Barghouti declarou que o veredito da Corte egípcia "is a vey unwise decision that carries policital complications. Hamas is part of the Palestinian national unity movement, and this decision is not useful."
O general Sissi tomou esta decisão logo após adotar uma nova lei anti-terrorismo que autoriza o Estado a fechar os locais de organizações "terroristas" e gelar as contas e bens de seus filiados. Ou seja, uma artimanha para engordar corfres públicos e contas pessoais em bancos suiços.
Desde o golpe que destituiu o presidente Mohamed Morsi da Irmandade Islâmica em julho de 2013 que os militares no poder egípcio têm perseguido seu partido por todos os meios possíveis.
E para ajudar Israel e os EUA a diabolizar o Hamas, acabaram acusando as Brigadas al-Qassam (que negou veementemente) de ajudar a Irmandade (sedenta de vingança pelas mortes de seus 1.400 compatriotas) em seus atentados na Península do Sinai em outubro de 2014.
Como se o Hamas, enjaulado e sofrendo privações enormes na Faixa de Gaza, tivesse disposição e meios financeiros e bélicos para ajudar um movimento internacional que pode transitar livremente nos países árabes. É surreal. Será que alguém acredita no que esse ditador diz? Sissi e Netanyahu foram feitos um para o outro. Casal 20. Obama é o padrinho deste casamento a/típico.
A Irmandade Muçulmana é um partido religioso, contudo, está longe de ser um movimento terrorista na linha do Al-Qaeda e do ISIL. Em Israel, existem pelo menos três partidos tão ou mais radicais do que a IM, e não são estigmatizados.
Portanto, se os EUA e Sissi a etiquetarem "terrorista", a marginalizarem, torturarem seus simpatizantes e neles cultvarem o ódio, talvez consigam radicalizá-los ao extremo.
Por enquanto, a maioria absoluta dos atentados no Sinai foram reivindicados pelo grupo Ansar Beit al-Maqdis, próximo do Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant - ISIL.
Nada, mas absolutamente nada a ver com o Hamas.
O movimento de resistência palestino é um legítimo movimento nacional de independência. Não é terrorista, não tem ramificações internacionais e nem ambições internacionalistas. Os palestinos só lutam por um Estado livre e soberano nas fronteiras onusianas de 1967. Terrorista, no caso, é o Estado de Israel que infringe toda hora as leis internacionais aterrorizando e espoliando mulheres e crianças além de suas fronteiras.
Paciência tem limite.
Discurso de Noam Chomsky na ONU no fim de fevereiro
In UN speech Noam Chomsky blasts the USA for supporting Israel
Esta coordenação compulsória foi imposta a Yasser Arafat em 1993 pelos Acordos de Oslo que criaram a Autoridade (Nacional) Palestina e obriga o governo palestino a compartilhar inteligência com o ocupante. Israel e os Estados Unidos consideram esta coordenação crucial para monitorarem os movimentos do Hamas e dos outros grupos de resistência mais radicais.
Ainda não se sabe se Mahmoud Abbas terá coragem de implementar a decisão do Conselho, mas normalmente a ANP acata as decisões da OLP por ser tradicionalmente a única organização histórica palestina que engloba a população inteira residente nos territórios ocupados, em Israel e na diáspora.
Mustapha Barghouti, representante dos independentes laicos, garantiu que sim, argumentando que a decisão era "binding, because it was the PLO hich created it [the PNA] and which signed the Oslo Accords."
A declaração oficial que os 110 membros divulgaram na quinta-feira dizia: "Security Coordination in all its forms with authority of the Israeli occupation will be stopped in the light of its [israel's] non-compliance with the agreements signed between the two sides. Israel should shoulder all its responsibilities towards the Palestinian people in the occupied state of Palestine as an occupation authority according to international law."
Os palestinos recorreram ao Conselho de Segurança da ONU em dezembro, mas a resolução - que solicitava o fim da ocupação da Cisjordânia no prazo de dois anos - foi vetada pelos Estados Unidos.
Diante desta parede USA, eles aderiram à Corte Penal Internacional em janeiro, onde tencionam processar israel por crimes de guerra.
Israel respondeu confiscando os impostos palestinos que arrecada para a ANP desde os Acordos de Oslo (blog . A quantia é de cerca de US$140 milhões por mês. Enquanto Israel lucra com o roubo, todos os organismos públicos palestinos - escolares, hospitalares, administrativos - são privados de fundos.
A arrecadação de impostos representa 70 por cento do orçamento público na Autoridade Nacional Palestina.
A situação na Cisjordânia foi se degradando a olhos vistos e no dia 22 de fevereiro, Abu Mazem-Mahmoud Abbas (em fase combativa como se o espírito de Yasser Arafat tivesse baixado em Ramallah), ameaçou cortar os security ties com Israel caso Tel Aviv continuasse a sequestrar os milhões de dólares palestinos.
A União Européia e os representantes árabes pediram que a ANP esperasse as eleições israelenses no dia 17 de março antes de cumprir sua ameaça, mas os palestinos temem, com conhecimento de causa, que o futuro primeiro ministro de Israel não mude nada e que confiscará seu dinheiro mensalmente até abril.
A ameaça não surtiu efeito porque já acontecera outras vezes sem ser levada a cabo. Israel ficou impassível e o dinheiro palestino continuou em seus cofres rendendo juros a seus banqueiros enquanto os palestinos estavam cada vez mais apertados.
Desta vez a coisa é mais séria porque a decisão foi tomada pela OLP, que sempre passa da intenção ao gesto, e Tel Aviv e Washington temem o rompimento dos "laços de segurança" a que obrigaram a Palestina nos Acordos de Oslo. Os famigerados Acordos de Oslo que só beneficiaram Israel em todos os sentidos sem a contrapartida dos palestinos obterem o Estado livre e soberano prometido para 1995.
The Young Turks desmascara Netanyahu durante a Operation Protective Edge
Eis o vídeo histórico mencionado acima.
Binyamin Netanyahu na colônia judia Ofra, na Cisjordânia, em 2001
"This is how I broke the Oslo Accords"
Em Tel Aviv, foi assim que Uri Avnery seguiu o discurso de seu Primeiro Ministro nos EUA
"I was watching The Speech by Binyamin Netanyahu before the Congress of the United States. Row upon row of men in suits (and the occasional woman), jumping up and down, up and down, applauding wildly, shouting approval.
It was the shouting that did it. Where had I heard that before?
And then it came back to me. It was another parliament in the mid-1930s. The Leader was speaking. Rows upon rows of Reichstag members were listening raptly. Every few minutes they jumped up and shouted their approval.
Of course, the Congress of the United States of America is no Reichstag. Members wear dark suits, not brown shirts. They do not shout "Heil" but something unintelligible. Yet the sound of the shouting had the same effect. Rather shocking.
But then I returned to the present. The sight was not frightening, but ridiculous. Here were the members of the most powerful parliament in the world behaving like a bunch of nincompoops.
Nothing like this could have happened in the Knesset. I do not have a very high opinion of our parliament, despite having been a member, but compared to this assembly, the Knesset is the fulfillment of Plato's dream.
Abba Eban once compared a speech by Menachem Begin to a French souffle cake: a lot of air and very little dough.
The same could be said about The Speech.
What did it contain? The Holocaust, of course, with that moral impostor, Elie Wiesel, sitting in the gallery right next to the beaming Sarah'le, who visibly relished her husband's triumph. (A few days before, she had shouted at the wife of a mayor in Israel: "Your man does not reach the ankles of my man!")
The Speech mentioned the Book of Esther, about the salvation of the Persian Jews from the evil Persian minister Haman, who intended to wipe them out. No one knows how this dubious composition came to be included in the Bible. God is not mentioned in it, it has nothing to do with the Holy Land, and Esther herself is more of a prostitute than a heroine. The book ends with the mass murder committed by the Jews against the Persians.
The Speech, like all speeches by Netanyahu, contained much about the suffering of the Jews throughout the ages, and the intentions of the evil Iranians, the New Nazis, to annihilate us. But this will not happen, because this time we have Binyamin Netanyahu to protect us. And the US Republicans, of course.
It was a good speech. One cannot make a bad speech when hundreds of admirers hang on every word and applaud every second. But it will not make an anthology of the world's Greatest Speeches.
Netanyahu considers himself a second Churchill. And indeed, Churchill was the only foreign leader before Netanyahu to speak to both houses of Congress a third time. But Churchill came to cement his alliance with the President of the United States, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who played a big part in the British war effort, while Netanyahu has come to spit in the face of the present president.
What did the speech not contain?
Not a word about Palestine and the Palestinians. Not a word about peace, the two-state solution, the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, Jerusalem. Not a word about apartheid, the occupation, the settlements. Not a word about Israel's own nuclear capabilities.
Not a word, of course, about the idea of a nuclear-weapon–free region, with mutual inspection.
Indeed, there was no concrete proposal at all. After denouncing the bad deal in the making, and hinting that Barack Obama and John Kerry are dupes and idiots, he offered no alternative.
Why? I assume that the original text of The Speech contained a lot. Devastating new sanctions against Iran. A demand for the total demolition of all Iranian nuclear installations. And in the inevitable end: a US-Israeli military attack.
All this was left out. He was warned by the Obama people in no uncertain terms that disclosure of details of the negotiations would be considered as a betrayal of confidence. He was warned by his Republican hosts that the American public was in no mood to hear about yet another war.
What was left? A dreary recounting of the well-known facts about the negotiations. It was the only tedious part of the speech. For minutes no one jumped up, nobody shouted approval. Elie Wiesel was shown sleeping. The most important person in the hall, Sheldon Adelson, the owner of the Congress republicans and of Netanyahu, was not shown at all. But he was there, keeping close watch on his servants.
By the way, whatever happened to Netanyahu's war?
Remember when the Israel Defense Forces were about to bomb Iran to smithereens? When the US military might was about to "take out" all Iranian nuclear installations?
Readers of this column might also remember that years ago I assured them that there would be no war. No ifs, no buts. No half-open back door for a retreat. I asserted that there would be no war, period.
Much later, all Israeli former military and intelligence chiefs spoke out against the war. The army Chief of Staff, Benny Gantz, who finished his term this week, has disclosed that no draft operation order for attacking Iran's nuclear capabilities was ever drawn up.
Why? Because such an operation could lead to a world-wide catastrophe. Iran would immediately close the Strait of Hormuz, just a few dozen miles wide, through which some 35% of the world's sea-borne oil must pass. It would mean an immediate world-wide economic breakdown.
To open the Strait and keep it open, a large part of Iran would have to be occupied in a land war, boots on the ground. Even Republicans shiver at the thought.
Israeli military capabilities fall far short of such an adventure. And, of course, Israel cannot dream of starting a war without express American consent.
That is reality. Not speechifying. Even American senators are capable of seeing the difference.
The centerpiece of The Speech was the demonization of Iran. Iran is evil incarnate. It leaders are subhuman monsters. All over the world, Iranian terrorists are at work planning monstrous outrages. They are building intercontinental ballistic missiles to destroy the US. Immediately after obtaining nuclear warheads – now or in ten years - they will annihilate Israel.
In reality, Israel's second-strike capability, based on the submarines supplied by Germany, would annihilate Iran within minutes. One of the most ancient civilizations in world history would come to an abrupt end. The ayatollahs would have to been clinically insane to do such a thing.
Netanyahu pretends to believe they are. Yet for years now, Israel has been conducting an amiable arbitration with the Iranian government about the Eilat-Ashkelon oil pipeline across Israel built by an Iranian-Israeli consortium. Before the Islamic revolution, Iran was Israel's stoutest ally in the region. Well after the revolution, Israel supplied Iran with arms in order to fight against Saddam Hussein's Iraq (the famous Irangate affair). And if one goes back to Esther and her sexual effort to save the Jews, why not mention Cyrus the Great, who allowed the Judean captives to return to Jerusalem?
Judging by its behavior, the present Iranian leadership has lost some of its initial religious fervor. It is behaving (not always speaking) in a very rational way, conducting tough negotiations as one would expect from Persians, aware of their immense cultural heritage, even more ancient than Judaism. Netanyahu is right in saying that one should not trust them with closed eyes, but his demonization is ridiculous.
Within the wider context, Israel and Iran are already indirect allies. For both, the Islamic State (ISIS) is the mortal enemy. To my mind, ISIS is far more dangerous to Israel, in the long run, than Iran. I imagine that for Tehran, ISIS is a far more dangerous enemy than Israel.
(The only memorable sentence in The Speech was "the enemy of my enemy is my enemy".)
If the worst comes to the worst, Iran will have its bomb in the end. So what?
I may be an arrogant Israeli, but I refuse to be afraid. I live a mile from the Israeli army high command in the center of Tel Aviv, and in a nuclear exchange I would evaporate. Yet I feel quite safe.
The United States has been exposed for decades (and still is) to thousands of Russian nuclear bombs, which could eradicate millions within minutes. They feel safe under the umbrella of the "balance of terror". Between us and Iran, in the worst situation, the same balance would come into effect.
WHhat is Netanyahu's alternative to Obama's policy? As Obama was quick to point out, he offered none.
The best possible deal will be struck. The danger will be postponed for ten years or more. And, as Chaim Weizmann [Israel's 1st president] once said: "The future will come and take care of the future."
Within these ten years, many things will happen. Regimes will change, enmities will turn into alliances and vice versa. Anything is possible.
Even - God and the Israeli voters willing - peace between Israel and Palestine, which would take the sting out of Israeli-Muslim relations."
Uri Avnery, 07/03/2015
AJ Listening Post: Israel's Election
The Media Battle
The Media Battle
Israel's Media Divided
Channel 4: Netanyahu and Israel Surreal elections
Grafiteiro inglês Banksy se engaja com os palestinos na luta pelo Direito
Lembrete: A faixa de Gaza continua em pedaços e os gazauís desabrigados
Lembrete: A faixa de Gaza continua em pedaços e os gazauís desabrigados
Banksy vai à Faixa de Gaza após deixar sua marca nos muros que esquartejam a Cisjordânia
Banksy explica seus motivos à Channel 4
"Benjamin Netanyahu did not “ruin” or “destroy” Israel’s relations with the United States. Too bad, because few things have corrupted Israel more than its warped relations with America. The prime minister only wrecked his personal relations with the current administration. Not good, but not too terrible.
Washington will continue to blindly finance, arm and support Israel in all its wars and occupations, with Netanyahu or without him. And it will resume its embrace of Israeli prime ministers once the current one is replaced. Just wait and watch the Americans and Europeans cheer if Isaac Herzog is chosen; just see how everything returns to normal with no lasting damage.
Depictions of Netanyahu as the destroyer of U.S.-Israeli relations are part of a demonization campaign now reaching its peak. Israel is beset by a curse, and that curse is named Netanyahu, only him.
He’s the devil incarnate. Every detail of his repellent behavior is portrayed as a crime and national calamity – just give us more examples like the misappropriation of garden furniture or the pocketing of bottle-deposit money, and we’ll show you the devil living at the prime minister’s residence.
Yes, Netanyahu is a bad prime minister, though not much worse, if that, than most of his predecessors. He has embarked on fewer unjustified wars than Ehud Olmert, he has built fewer settlements than Ehud Barak (relative to his time in office), and he’s apparently less corrupt than Ariel Sharon. Israel’s situation in many areas has deteriorated during his term, but this process didn’t start when he took over and will not end when he leaves.
The view is that Israel’s only problem is Netanyahu; his removal will herald redemption. But Netanyahu isn’t the only problem, not even the main one, and his removal will definitely not achieve any resolution.
The harping on him has long exceeded rational limits; it’s like voodoo ceremonies or exorcism rituals. Maybe his effigy will be burned at the Lag Ba’omer bonfires this May. A curse hangs over Israel and its name is Netanyahu, only Netanyahu. He embodies all our demons, without even mentioning his Lady Macbeth.
How easy it is to ascribe everything to him. How convenient it is to pin all the ills of this country and society on his imperious image with his glued hair and fake pathos, believing that it’s not us, it’s him. How easy it is to believe that all will be well when’s gone, that all our wounds will be healed and a thousand flowers will bloom.
This of course is the easy way to deal with problems, typical of a society in denial. He’s the “illegal outposts” whose removal will end the occupation. He’s like Yasser Arafat was; if only he were gone, peace would prevail. If only we get rid of Netanyahu, all will be well.
This is laughable when considering Netanyahu’s rivals Herzog, Tzipi Livni, Yair Lapid and Moshe Kahlon. Much less will change if they take power than is projected in the demonization campaign.
How easy it is to canvass against him and how fashionable it is to sigh “Oh, that Netanyahu.” Just give us more pitchforks against this enemy of the people. It’s not that there isn’t anything to attack him for — the list of damage is long — but the exaggerations and focus on him alone have made the campaign suspect.
On Tuesday he’s speaking at a joint session of Congress. Israeli analysts, who never step outside the consensus of the herd, will compete over who shoots better barbs at him and who better describes the “historic” damage his speech will cause U.S.-Israeli relations. But soon a new squadron of the latest fighter jets will land here, supplied by the United States to Netanyahu’s Israel so it can bomb Gaza once again."
Gideon Levy | Mar. 1, 2015. Gideon tweets at @levy_haaretz.com
Perguntas/Respostas, Norman Finkelstein em Dublin - 23/02/2015 (13')
Conferência completa (94')
Abaixo, Tom Finn entrevista Norman Finkelstein no dia 05 de março
Peace or Palestine surrender? An interview with Norman Finkelstein. The ostracised American scholar discusses US-Iran negotiations, Hezbollah’s intervention in Syria and the evolution of the BDS movement.
E na Inglaterra, a Universidade de Cambridge declara Israel um Rogue state
Cambridge University declares Israel Rogue state
This prompts several comments:
1. It becomes apparent from periodic reports of “preparations for escalation” that the IDF – in other words, that force defending the occupation – views itself as a party that is only reactive. It is not responsible for escalation and certainly isn’t initiating any such action.
2. If it were not for those Palestinians who got stuck between the military bases, the roadblocks, appearing on monitors in situation rooms and in the armored personnel carriers, the IDF could have fulfilled its real destination: as a society for the protection of nature.
3. If the Palestinians had pushed themselves in among our beloved settlements from the Lucifer outpost in the southern West Bank to the Reihan settlement further north, our soldiers could have been devoting themselves to helping the elderly cross the street.
4. Here’s a case of non-escalation: Armed Israelis raided the Deheisheh refugee camp in the West Bank last Tuesday night. They killed a young Palestinian (because those insolent Palestinians resisted the intrusion into their homes). In a raid the previous evening on the Aida refugee camp, an armed Israeli force wounded five young Palestinians with live ammunition. They too had the nerve to resist the raid and a kidnapping attempt.
On Friday, another force of armed Israelis from that army defending the settlements broke up a demonstration in Hebron using live ammunition consisting of rubber-coated metal bullets, along with stun grenades and tear gas. The armed Israelis wounded about 20 demonstrators, including – according to Palestinian reports – five with live ammunition fire. What nerve the demonstrators have, protesting the expulsion of Palestinians from the center of Hebron, emptying it of its residents.
5. In 2014, Israeli soldiers and police from those settlement defense forces injured 5,868 Palestinians in the West Bank (including East Jerusalem). On a weekly basis, on average the army carries out 75 raids on West Bank Palestinian neighborhoods and villages. Last week, during the night between Tuesday and Wednesday, the forces carried out 29 raids throughout the West Bank and abducted about 20 Palestinians from their homes. That same day, the Palestinians recorded 192 occupation-related incidents: soldiers who injured residents, blocked roads and carried out arrests, as well as attacks committed by settlers. That was a good day. No one was killed.
6. Another non-escalation: On Saturday, two residents of the West Bank village of Jab’ah, southwest of Bethlehem, were detained by soldiers while on their way to work their land. That same day, armed crews on Israeli battleships fired at fishermen north of Gaza City. Other armed Israelis fired at farmers in the central Gaza Strip.
7. What is non-escalation on Israel’s part? The expansion of construction in the West Bank settlement of Ma’aleh Adumim; the confiscation of Palestinian land to build a new garbage dump for Jerusalem; restrictions on Palestinian construction and grazing in Area C – the portion of the West Bank under the full control of Israel, control of water resources to an extent that there is no more water fit to drink in the Gaza Strip; and demands that people cooperate with the Shin Bet security service in return for reinstatement of work permits. And then there are the curses, including sexist ones, uttered by contractors and drivers working for the IDF’s Civil Administration, directed at demonstrators and journalists at the “Gates of Jerusalem” protest camp at Abu Dis.
8. Another case of non-escalation: Last week, soldiers at the Beka’ot checkpoint in the northern Jordan Valley disrupted traffic (between Nablus and the Jordan Valley) on orders of their commanders. They carried out inspections of cars on just one side of the checkpoint, while the Palestinian motorists on the other side were left killing considerable time. The soldiers then switched to inspect the other side, creating a long line of vehicles where they had first carried out inspections. When asked about this unreported incident of harassment, the IDF spokesman’s office responded: “In light of repeated attempts to break into the checkpoint recently, temporary changes have been instituted in the security arrangements at the crossing. It involves a security-related and operational step and is aimed at enhancing oversight at the crossing.” Collective punishment by wasting people’s time? Can’t be.
9. “Escalation” is always at the Palestinians’ initiative and they are responsible for it. It’s escalation when the Palestinians cease fulfilling their obligation to exercise restraint.
10. Nevertheless, escalation is good for the army. It means more training exercises, more funding, joint forces training using live ammunition, using up old ammunition stockpiles to make room for the new; first-time use of newly-developed weaponry and new weapons orders from the United States and India. The names of new officers begin to become better known. That will be good for their resumes in the future, when the opportunity arises to apply to serve as a military attaché abroad, or to train units protecting a dictator somewhere or some gated community for millionaires in South America.
11. Escalation is also good for the top leadership. The people align behind the leadership and the idea that we, the Jews, are yet again the persecuted victims.
12. Escalation is good for the Jews. The problems of housing prices and discrimination against the periphery pale by comparison. It is again clear that we are one people standing behind one leader and one army.
13. Non-escalation is also good for the Jews. Construction continues in the settlements of Ma’aleh Adumim and Ariel in an effort to solve Israel’s housing shortage, along with the expulsion of Bedouin (for the above purpose). Deals are signed for the sale of weapons to the world. Israelis continue to be prison warden to the world’s biggest prison (Gaza); and people continue to vote for the right wing, because it and the army are always right – both when the Palestinians exercise restraint and when they don’t." Amira Hass tweets at @Hass_Haaretz.com
8. Another case of non-escalation: Last week, soldiers at the Beka’ot checkpoint in the northern Jordan Valley disrupted traffic (between Nablus and the Jordan Valley) on orders of their commanders. They carried out inspections of cars on just one side of the checkpoint, while the Palestinian motorists on the other side were left killing considerable time. The soldiers then switched to inspect the other side, creating a long line of vehicles where they had first carried out inspections. When asked about this unreported incident of harassment, the IDF spokesman’s office responded: “In light of repeated attempts to break into the checkpoint recently, temporary changes have been instituted in the security arrangements at the crossing. It involves a security-related and operational step and is aimed at enhancing oversight at the crossing.” Collective punishment by wasting people’s time? Can’t be.
9. “Escalation” is always at the Palestinians’ initiative and they are responsible for it. It’s escalation when the Palestinians cease fulfilling their obligation to exercise restraint.
10. Nevertheless, escalation is good for the army. It means more training exercises, more funding, joint forces training using live ammunition, using up old ammunition stockpiles to make room for the new; first-time use of newly-developed weaponry and new weapons orders from the United States and India. The names of new officers begin to become better known. That will be good for their resumes in the future, when the opportunity arises to apply to serve as a military attaché abroad, or to train units protecting a dictator somewhere or some gated community for millionaires in South America.
11. Escalation is also good for the top leadership. The people align behind the leadership and the idea that we, the Jews, are yet again the persecuted victims.
12. Escalation is good for the Jews. The problems of housing prices and discrimination against the periphery pale by comparison. It is again clear that we are one people standing behind one leader and one army.
13. Non-escalation is also good for the Jews. Construction continues in the settlements of Ma’aleh Adumim and Ariel in an effort to solve Israel’s housing shortage, along with the expulsion of Bedouin (for the above purpose). Deals are signed for the sale of weapons to the world. Israelis continue to be prison warden to the world’s biggest prison (Gaza); and people continue to vote for the right wing, because it and the army are always right – both when the Palestinians exercise restraint and when they don’t." Amira Hass tweets at @Hass_Haaretz.com
Al jazeera revela Israel's Spy Cables
General Sissi, pior do Mubarack?
"Egypt's current "deep state" seems to be "deep" only in security and bureaucracy, while its performance in politics and strategy continues to be "shallow". The latest episode showcasing such shallowness - including the military's "discovery" of a cure for AIDS and kidney diseases - is the regime's ban on Hamas, declaring the movement's activities and presence in Egypt illegal.
"Egypt's current "deep state" seems to be "deep" only in security and bureaucracy, while its performance in politics and strategy continues to be "shallow". The latest episode showcasing such shallowness - including the military's "discovery" of a cure for AIDS and kidney diseases - is the regime's ban on Hamas, declaring the movement's activities and presence in Egypt illegal.
If Egypt's generals have resurrected the tactics of Hosni Mubarak's regime, including the recent appointment of a former protege as prime minister, these generals seem to lack some of the sophistication of Mubarak's politics. Over the years, the tense relationship and mutual hatred between Mubarak and Hamas was more than obvious. But even then, Egypt showed more calculated domestic and regional politics and kept Hamas on board.
Political miscalculations
Even at its lowest point, when Hamas was accused of killing Egyptian soldiers across the Gaza/Egypt borders, Mubarak's regime believed that sustaining links with the group was vital for Egypt's regional role and politics, as well as for security considerations along Gaza borders and in the Sinai desert.
It is a basic tenet in politics that severing links with political actors is an extreme step that many countries should avoid. When these actors function in neighbouring countries, ignoring this tenet becomes an act of stupidity and comes at a high cost.
By comparison, Iran has maintained its links with Hamas despite the latter's outrageous position, from Tehran's perspective, regarding the Syrian revolution against Bashar al-Assad, Iran's vital ally in the region.
A hasty and emotional decision to cut off ties with Hamas could satisfy momentary anger and sate politicians' thirst for revenge, but it weighs little in political calculations.
Since they took power in July 2013, Egypt's army generals have displayed all forms of enmity against the Palestinian group, and the Gaza Strip. By extension, two million Palestinians have been suffering because of Egypt's destruction of tunnels at the Rafah Crossing. In their frantic search for scapegoats, the generals found a convenient case in Hamas and the "threat" it poses to Egyptian national security.
Egypt's state-run media took the cue from the military and has launched a damning campaign against Hamas that eludes both sense and sensibility. This media discovered that Hamas is planning to occupy the Sinai desert and annex it to Gaza, conspiring to destroy Egypt's army, inviting all sorts of militant and Jihadist groups and training them in Sinai, killing and kidnapping Egyptian soldiers and smuggling the killers into the Gaza Strip via tunnels and hiding Muslim Brotherhood leaders in Gaza and helping them to come back to power.
In a nutshell, Hamas has been projected in the political and media discourse of the ruling military elite in Cairo as nothing short of a regional superpower.
To be sure, Hamas itself is not entirely innocent of committing grave mistakes, with a catalogue of bad politics and hasty actions. And Hamas' Brotherhood affiliation is no new discovery; rather it is well-known to everyone including governments that have had long and bloody conflicts with the Brotherhood.
Political miscalculations
Even at its lowest point, when Hamas was accused of killing Egyptian soldiers across the Gaza/Egypt borders, Mubarak's regime believed that sustaining links with the group was vital for Egypt's regional role and politics, as well as for security considerations along Gaza borders and in the Sinai desert.
It is a basic tenet in politics that severing links with political actors is an extreme step that many countries should avoid. When these actors function in neighbouring countries, ignoring this tenet becomes an act of stupidity and comes at a high cost.
By comparison, Iran has maintained its links with Hamas despite the latter's outrageous position, from Tehran's perspective, regarding the Syrian revolution against Bashar al-Assad, Iran's vital ally in the region.
A hasty and emotional decision to cut off ties with Hamas could satisfy momentary anger and sate politicians' thirst for revenge, but it weighs little in political calculations.
Since they took power in July 2013, Egypt's army generals have displayed all forms of enmity against the Palestinian group, and the Gaza Strip. By extension, two million Palestinians have been suffering because of Egypt's destruction of tunnels at the Rafah Crossing. In their frantic search for scapegoats, the generals found a convenient case in Hamas and the "threat" it poses to Egyptian national security.
Egypt's state-run media took the cue from the military and has launched a damning campaign against Hamas that eludes both sense and sensibility. This media discovered that Hamas is planning to occupy the Sinai desert and annex it to Gaza, conspiring to destroy Egypt's army, inviting all sorts of militant and Jihadist groups and training them in Sinai, killing and kidnapping Egyptian soldiers and smuggling the killers into the Gaza Strip via tunnels and hiding Muslim Brotherhood leaders in Gaza and helping them to come back to power.
In a nutshell, Hamas has been projected in the political and media discourse of the ruling military elite in Cairo as nothing short of a regional superpower.
To be sure, Hamas itself is not entirely innocent of committing grave mistakes, with a catalogue of bad politics and hasty actions. And Hamas' Brotherhood affiliation is no new discovery; rather it is well-known to everyone including governments that have had long and bloody conflicts with the Brotherhood.
Nevertheless, they have nurtured links with Hamas (such as the regimes of Bashar al-Assad and his father before him). It is no new discovery that Hamas used part of the tunnels to smuggle weapons into the Gaza Strip.
And it is no new discovery that some grey areas do exist where elements of extremist violent groups in Sinai may establish links with elements close to Hamas.
The wrong battle
Nevertheless, the best way to clear many grey areas with Hamas is to engage with them. In doing so, Hamas is wooed to moderate its politics and discourse. It can help safeguard the borders, instead of being part of the problem, with some members of the movement cooperating with radical groups such as the Organisation of the Supporters of Ansar al-Maqdis.
By banning Hamas and launching a "war on terror" against a group that is widely supported by considerable segments of Arabs and Muslims, Abdel Fattah al-Sisi's Egypt is picking the wrong fight with the wrong party at the wrong time.
In fact, this ban and its broader "war" is an open invitation for extremist groups in Gaza and Sinai to further demonise the regime in Egypt, and continue their activities against Egyptian targets.
Lack of rational calculus have all led the military and judiciary to a decision that is not only contradictory in nature but also harmful to Egypt itself. The contradiction amplifies the confusion that already exists in the "legal case" against the ousted president Mohammad Morsi who is accused of "collaborating" with Hamas.
If contacting Hamas is a crime then a long list of officials, ministers and heads intelligence, prior to Morsi, should be brought to court as well.
Along with Morsi and other Muslim Brotherhood leaders, there were a number of Hamas members accused of helping the Brothers in breaking into prisons, and conduct illegal activities in Egypt. Some of the accused turned out to be either dead or already spending many years in Israeli jails.
Because of the absurdities surrounding the case against Morsi and charges of collaboration with Hamas there were some expectations that over the repeated postponement of his trial, the authorities may find a way to drop it out, or tone it down. Instead, the military regime digs the hole even deeper.
The political short-sightedness of this most recent move could also be seen because of the limitations that it imposes on Egyptian diplomacy. The role of Egypt within Palestinian politics, particularly on the reconciliation track between Fatah and Hamas has now become reduced.
Any future involvement by Egypt in reaching a Hamas-Israel military truce will also be limited, depriving Egypt from manifesting its diplomacy and expanding regional leverage. The same applies to the current peace talks between the Palestinians and Israel, which have entered a very critical phase.
By proscribing Hamas, Egypt needlessly limits its potential capacity to assume regional roles.
Egypt's decision to impose a ban on the activities of a Palestinian resistance group in the country is unique throughout the history of Arab relationships with Palestine. Eventually, any government in Cairo will revoke this decision, either formally or they'll just ignore it.
Egypt can't afford to boycott a party that rules the Gaza Strip, and enjoys large support among Palestinians. Until then, the amateurish politics of Egypt's rulers may surprise us with more decisions of the sort, which are both laughable and tragic."
Khaled Hroub is Professor of Middle Eastern Studies and Arab Media Studies at Northwestern University/Qatar, and a senior research fellow at the Centre of Islamic Studies of the University of Cambridge.
And it is no new discovery that some grey areas do exist where elements of extremist violent groups in Sinai may establish links with elements close to Hamas.
The wrong battle
Nevertheless, the best way to clear many grey areas with Hamas is to engage with them. In doing so, Hamas is wooed to moderate its politics and discourse. It can help safeguard the borders, instead of being part of the problem, with some members of the movement cooperating with radical groups such as the Organisation of the Supporters of Ansar al-Maqdis.
By banning Hamas and launching a "war on terror" against a group that is widely supported by considerable segments of Arabs and Muslims, Abdel Fattah al-Sisi's Egypt is picking the wrong fight with the wrong party at the wrong time.
In fact, this ban and its broader "war" is an open invitation for extremist groups in Gaza and Sinai to further demonise the regime in Egypt, and continue their activities against Egyptian targets.
Lack of rational calculus have all led the military and judiciary to a decision that is not only contradictory in nature but also harmful to Egypt itself. The contradiction amplifies the confusion that already exists in the "legal case" against the ousted president Mohammad Morsi who is accused of "collaborating" with Hamas.
If contacting Hamas is a crime then a long list of officials, ministers and heads intelligence, prior to Morsi, should be brought to court as well.
Along with Morsi and other Muslim Brotherhood leaders, there were a number of Hamas members accused of helping the Brothers in breaking into prisons, and conduct illegal activities in Egypt. Some of the accused turned out to be either dead or already spending many years in Israeli jails.
Because of the absurdities surrounding the case against Morsi and charges of collaboration with Hamas there were some expectations that over the repeated postponement of his trial, the authorities may find a way to drop it out, or tone it down. Instead, the military regime digs the hole even deeper.
The political short-sightedness of this most recent move could also be seen because of the limitations that it imposes on Egyptian diplomacy. The role of Egypt within Palestinian politics, particularly on the reconciliation track between Fatah and Hamas has now become reduced.
Any future involvement by Egypt in reaching a Hamas-Israel military truce will also be limited, depriving Egypt from manifesting its diplomacy and expanding regional leverage. The same applies to the current peace talks between the Palestinians and Israel, which have entered a very critical phase.
By proscribing Hamas, Egypt needlessly limits its potential capacity to assume regional roles.
Egypt's decision to impose a ban on the activities of a Palestinian resistance group in the country is unique throughout the history of Arab relationships with Palestine. Eventually, any government in Cairo will revoke this decision, either formally or they'll just ignore it.
Egypt can't afford to boycott a party that rules the Gaza Strip, and enjoys large support among Palestinians. Until then, the amateurish politics of Egypt's rulers may surprise us with more decisions of the sort, which are both laughable and tragic."
Khaled Hroub is Professor of Middle Eastern Studies and Arab Media Studies at Northwestern University/Qatar, and a senior research fellow at the Centre of Islamic Studies of the University of Cambridge.
Gaza cai de pé e a garotada segue em frente, ferida, sofrida,
mas de cabeça alta
União Europeia condena mais um crime de Israel:
Destruição de um abrigo em Jerusalém Oriental que financiara para os palestinos
A outra manchete da semana foi a vitória de Bashar El-Assad em uma batalha importante contra o al-Nusra, Al-Qaeda na Síria. Não foram os Estados Unidos com suas armas sofisticadas que conseguiram dar cabo de Abu Hamman al-Shami e sim o Exército regular sírio. Uma semana após o Nusra celebrar a destruição de um quartel sírio em Aleppo, Bashar deu o troco atacando a Frente extremista em uma reunião clandestina. Não foi um golpe fatal no Nusra, mas foi um golpe que tonteou seu comando inteiro.
Enquanto isso, após ver muitos de seus sítios bombardeados pelo Exército estadunidense que ignorava a importância história do Iraque, antia Mesopotâmia e berço dos Jardins suspensos da Babilônia, está sendo a vez do ISIL botar abaixo os sítios arqueológicos que haviam sobrado. Na semana passada foi a vez de um palácio Assírio em Nimrud ser esmagado por um bulldozer como os israelenses esmagam as casas dos palestinos nos territórios ocupados e seus sítios arqueológicos, que são também parte da nossa história. Bárbaros radicais que cometem crimes e crimes contra a História da humanidade. El-Bagdadi, Binyamin Netanyahu, Ehud Barak, Avigdor Lieberman, Tzipi Livni, etcétera e tal, apesar da diferença de religião, são farinha do mesmo saco. Só algumas dezenas de quilômetros os separam.
EMPIRE: ISRAEL and the US
I (25')
II (22')
10 maneiras de detetar um especialista bona fide do "conflito" Israel vs Palestina,
segundo Jamie Stern-Weiner
- They refer to Israeli politicians by their top-secret code-names: ‘Bibi’ (Netanyahu), ‘Bougie’ (Herzog), ‘Bogie’ (Ya’alon), ‘Silver Fox’ (Lapid), ‘Longstocking’ (Livni) and ‘Sweet cheeks’ (Lieberman)
- They are aware of the strategic importance of the highly successful Iron Dome
- They appreciate the fact that the Middle East is a tough neighbourhood where nothing is certain
- They have further discovered that the conflict, contrary to less informed opinion, is highly complex and neither black nor white
- They do not report Israeli parties’ stated positions on the various final status issues over time – such trivialities are beneath their analytical prowess and ill-suited for their eloquent prose
- What Palestine Papers?
- Being so intimate with the region’s politics, they rest their conclusions upon ‘conversations’ and ‘things they saw'; in more high-end venues, they may also cite a column by Nathan Thrall
- They do not make predictions – cf. points 3 and 4 above – but concentrate on the important task of arguing about what just happened and what ought to happen
- They are aware that a complex and multifaceted term like ‘two-state solution’ resists simple or indeed any definition
- Their psychoanalytic acuity has enabled them to divine that ‘Bibi’ has a ‘Churchill complex’, and their political insight allows them to see that this is really quite important.
Apartheid Adventures
XIII
Israeli Apartheid Week 2015
Max Blumenthal fala durante a Apartheid Week; Glasgow, 06/03/2015
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário