Os Estados Unidos consideram Bom o Negócio em que levam vantagem a curto prazo e tirem deste tempo contado o máximo proveito, custe o que custar.
Israel considera Bom Negócio o que o privilegia em todos os sentidos e deixa o oponente knockout.
O Irã considera Bom Negócio o que acabou de fazer sob tutela russa com a chamada comunidade internacional liderada pelos EUA.
Após 18 meses improdutivos, a delegação EUA-aliados entendeu que os russos tinham razão e pararam de exigir dos iranianos o que não podiam dar. Aí o clima da mesa de negociações melhorou e de imposição a reunião passou a negociação de verdade. E após décadas de sansões econômicas absurdas, as longas Nuclear Talks que Israel tentou evitar e não pára de mau agourar foram concluídas de forma positiva, já que, em princípio, ninguém saiu perdendo. Já que, no fundo, o Irã está mais interessado em estabilizar sua situação econômica periclitante devido às décadas de embargo do que fabricar uma bomba atômica cara que jamais usará.
É claro que o negócio só será bom se os EUA cumprirem a palavra. O que é difícil (devido a costumes arraigados de visão unilateral de Bom Negócio), mas não impossível. É só Barack Obama ter coragem de enfrentar a AIPAC, ou seja, os inúmeros deputados e senadores que este lobby judeu extremista financia no Congresso dos Estados Unidos. Se houver uma determinação real de cumprir a palavra, Obama contará sobretudo com as bancadas negra e latina, independentes dos tentáculos sionistas, para que os corruptos vassalos de Israel não obtenham a maioria de dois terços necessária para contrariar as diretivas do Presidente.
O teor da vitória cidental em Lausanne é o seguinte: Iran’s infrastructure for uranium enrichment will be reduced by more than two thirds, from 19,000 installed centrifuges, to 6,104, of which only 5,060 will be used for uranium enrichment, for a period of 10 years; Iran’s stockpile of low-enriched uranium will be reduced by 98% to 300kg for a period of 15 years; Iran’s heavy water reactor will be redesigned so it produces only tiny amounts of plutonium; Iran’s underground enrichment plant at Fordow will be turned into a research centre for medical and scientific work; Iran will be open to enhanced inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency for 20 years.
Em contrapartida, o Irã obtém o que queria desde o início, isto é, a suspensão das sansões que estrangularam sua Economia e ao mesmo tempo, manter seu programa nuclear no ponto desejado. Não que as sanções tenham sido contraproducentes politicamente para os aiatolás. (Não foram. As dificuldades são vistas internamente como de única responsabilidade dos Estados Unidos e de Israel, portanto, o governo não sofreu desgaste.) É que os governantes iranianos há tempos buscavam uma legitimidade internacional cuja representação concreta é a regularização de suas relações internacionais.
A sutileza iraniana funcionou direitinho. Ao ponto de seus adversários poderem cantar vitória e o povo iraniano regozijar-se. Quem diria?
Enfim, um Bom Negócio.
O único insatisfeito com este Bom Negócio é Binyamin Netanyahu, que queria que o Irã fosse eterno paria da sociedade internacional enquanto que Israel, o terrorista mor, fosse deixado em paz para continuar sua escalada ilegal. Mas quem só fez inimigos ao longo da carreira de fora-da-lei tem mesmo é de piar fino. O Primeiro Ministro de Israel terá de engolir este sapo porque até os altos oficiais e agentes da IDF e do Mossad são contrários a um confronto direto com Teerã. Sabem que o Irã não é presa exangue e indefesa como a Palestina e Israel sairia dificilmente ileso de um conflito com um país que tem forças armadas. A IDF não tem costume e nem está preparada para lutar de igual para igual. Só sabe bombardear em sentido único. Especializou-se em massacres. E seus soldados só sabem humilhar e matar civis desarmados; não aprendem a combater adversário armado.
Extrato do discurso de Rouhani (7')
Recapitulando este Nuclear deal, as negociações começaram em 2003 com a União Europeia. Sem margem de manobra, o Irã acabou propondo baixar a capacidade de suas centrífugas para 3.000 mediante reconhecimento de seus direitos de enriquecimento de urânio.
O Acordo desmoronou em 2005 e desde então o Irã continuou seu programa nuclear paulatinamente. Com tecnologia russa e chinesa, passou da produção de urânio de baixo-enriquecimento a 20% de enriquecimento. Um passo largo que permitiu que sentasse à mesa de negociações com a margem de manobra que não tinha em 2005. Deu certo. Disporá de urânio para a energia civil que precisa e sairá do abismo do ostracismo comercial em que os EUA o haviam jogado.
Desta vez talvez os ocidentais cumpram a palavra, pois os europeus temem realmente uma escalada nuclear nos países árabes, que estão longe dos EUA, mas às portas da Europa cansada de guerra em casa.
DN: Former Iranian Ambassador:
Historical Nuclear agreement prevents another war in the Middle East
Na perspectiva da Arábia Saudita, o Irã sair de seu estado de pária significa duas coisas: O Irã melhorará seu padrão econômico e fabricará, mais tarde, se quiser, sua bomba atômica. Já que este Acordo é de 15 anos. Tanto a estabilidade e desenvolvimento econômico quanto a energia atômica fortificarão a influência iraniana sobre seus vizinhos que dispõem de governos fracos e sectários - Líbano, Iraque e Yêmen - o que enfraqueceria grupos como o ISIL, Nusra, Al-Qaeda, patrocinados para semear o caos.E a Arábia Saudita perderia esta dominação militar que lhe dá estatuto de liderança, provada no bombardeio do Yêmen para destruir os Houthi e preservar sua influência às custas dos yemenitas.
Os novos governantes sauditas estão apostando em uma equação política que enfraqueça seus adversários e está procurando novos aliados que lhe forneçam a tecnologia nuclear que os EUA não querem lhe dar. Nesse caso, combateria seus inimigos diretamente em vez de combater pela Casa Branca.
Há anos que a Arábia Saudita vem redesenhando o mapa geopolítico do Oriente Médio fomentando rebeldias locais e rebeldes que enfraqueçam seus rivais (Síria) e protejam seus aliados (Egito, Bahrein, etc.). Resta saber se conseguirá completar o mapa e quanto tempo levará.
Com o Irã na jogada, este investimento vai por água abaixo.
Quanto ao GCC - Gulf Cooperation Council - seus membros ficaram bastante chateados por não terem sido convidados a Lausanne para as Nuclear Talks. Sentem-se parte interessada e desprezada. O que é um fato, mas comum na 'comunidade internacional', onde apenas a opinião da UE+EUA conta e prevalece. É ponto pacífico que a nossa América Latina, a Ásia, Oceânia e África conhecem de cor e decorado. Os países árabes têm um complexo que os leva a reagir mal a esta exclusão à qual estamos acostumados; veem esta arrogância como algo pessoal, embora não seja. Mas têm razão de não entender porquê o GCC não foi convidado à Suíça sendo que o Irã está mais perto deles do que dos países dos negociadores.
Sabem que um acordo entre EUA e Irã estipula concessões mútuas e temem as exigências do Irã suplementares às do fim das sanções. Pois estão vendo que os EUA, após o erro crasso com Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi e Assad (que transformaram o Oriente Médio e o norte da África em um barril de pólvora) entendem que o Irã é o único governo estável, sem ISIL e sem atentados, e que pode ser um aliado no combate desses extremistas que podem atravessar terras e mares.
No ponto de vista político, o reconhecimento do Irã prejudicará a hegemonia dos países do golfo. Com certeza. Na realidade pós-Acordo, as potências regionais serão três: a Turquia, Israel e o Irã que toma o lugar da Síria.
No ponto de vista econômico, o fim do embargo representaria/á para o Irã uma exportação de petróleo estimada a 1.5 milhões de barris diários. Barris que inundariam o mercado de produto barato, já que o Irã precisa escoar sua produção e qualquer cifra superior a US$1 já seria lucro, já que há anos seu comércio está bloqueado. E a queda maior ainda do petróleo prejudicaria ainda mais os países do golfo que já estão tendo de baixar seu padrão de vida - enfim, apertar o cinto para os dirigentes árabes é parar de dar caviar para seus cães de guarda.
Os países do golfo terão de procurar cooperações regionais, com certeza o Paquistão e a a Turquia, que também temem que o Irã tenha ambições regionais que prejudiquem seus ganhos.
A aliança militar para atacar o Yêmen prova que o GCC já é uma potência. Mas isto não lhes basta. Estão acostumados a mandar, com poder absoluto em seus regimes sectários e autoritários. Com o Irã na jogada, não poderão impor à região o cabresto e as leis arcaicas que impõem em casa.
Quanto a Israel, imagina um mundo totalmente empírico em que o Irã, com apenas 2% do PIB mundial possa representar uma ameaça ao império estadunidense.
No mundo real, esta ameaça só existe nas fabulaçõs de Binyamin Netanyahu e em sua inflação estatística no número de centrífugas iranianas.
Uma bomba atômica iraniana não é ameaça nem para os EUA quem dirá para Israel, que segundo documento de 1987 do Pentágono, os israelenses, além de possuirem inúmeras bombas atômicas, estavam fazendo experiência com "coding, which will enable them to make hydrogen bombs. A thousand times more powerful than atom bombs."
Isto foi 28 anos atrás. Hoje as tais bombas já devem estar prontas e do conhecimento dos EUA, razão pela qual Barack Obama não se deixa enganar pelo 'temor" de Netanyahu, que poderia destruir o Irã e a Europa inteira em um piscar de olhos. Literalmente.
Ao conrário de Israel e dos EUA, os aiatolás têm boa memória. Depois da guerra de oito anos contra o Iraque (1980-88) em que perdeu cerca de 250 mil cidadãos e muitos deles vítimas de armas químicas, o Irã não quer nem pensar em conflito armado. A hasbara de Netanyahu sobre um "second Holocaust of the Jewish people" é tão improvável quanto a uniformização da comunidade judéia como se o judaismo fosse uma nação e não uma religião e como se todos os judeus aprovassem os delírios e malefícios de Tel Aviv. Isto é realidade nó na hasbara.
O que Israel teme é que com uma bomba nuclear dissuasiva o Irã os impeça de bombardear o Líbano, a Síria e até, quem sabe, a Palestina.
O que Israel teme, como já disse anteriormente, é o equilíbrio - mesmo sendo relativo - de poder.
Israel teria de resignar-se a ter um adversário de peso em vez de adversários de arsenal limitado, como é o caso do Hizbollah; artesanal, como é o caso do Hamas; e nenhum, como é o caso dos palestinos da Cisjordânia.
E a bomba atômica iraniana mudaria sobretudo a relação privilegiada de Israel com os EUA. Pois nesse caso Washington que só pensa em interesses próprios, deixaria de preocupar-se e ocupar-se apenas das estratégias israelenses e passaria a pensar em estratégias regionais. Petróleo + bomba atômica poderiam cimentar boas relações entre Teerã e Washington.
Na verdade, o programa nuclear iraniano, para o mundo, é uma vantagem. Primeiro porque representa um equilíbrio de forças e estabilidade. Para a Palestina é mais vantagem ainda, pois obrigaria Israel a levar a sério a premissa de seu direito a um Estado autônomo em fronteiras bem delimitadas.
Que o Irã entre no clube nuclear rapidinho, já que desarmar os outros membros é utopia. Sobretudo sabendo da tal bomba israelense de hidrogênio. Xô Satanás!
Pesquisa do Pew Research Center nos EUA sobre Israel e o acordo com o Irã: More Approve Than Disapprove of Iran Talks, But Most Think Iranians Are ‘Not Serious’, 04/04/2015
I know that this makes me an abnormal person, almost a freak.
But what can I do? I am unable to work up fear, like a real Israeli. Try as I may, the Iranian bomb does not make me hysterical.
My father once taught me how to withstand blackmail: imagine that the awful threat of the blackmailer has already come about. Then you can tell him: Go to hell.
I have tried many times to follow this advice and found it sound. So now I apply it to the Iranian bomb: I imagine that the worst has already happened: the awful ayatollahs have got the bombs that can eradicate little Israel in a minute.
So what?
According to foreign experts, Israel has several hundred nuclear bombs (assessments vary between 80-400. If Iran sends its bombs and obliterates most of Israel (myself included), Israeli submarines will obliterate Iran. Whatever I might think about Binyamin Netanyahu, I rely on him and our security chiefs to keep our "second strike" capability intact. Just last week we were informed that Germany had delivered another state-of-the-art submarine to our navy for this purpose.
Israeli idiots – and there are some around – respond: "Yes, but the Iranian leaders are not normal people. They are madmen. Religious fanatics. They will risk the total destruction of Iran just to destroy the Zionist state. Like exchanging queens in chess."
Such convictions are the outcome of decades of demonizing. Iranians – or at least their leaders – are seen as subhuman miscreants.
Reality shows us that the leaders of Iran are very sober, very calculating politicians. Cautious merchants in the Iranian bazaar style. They don't take unnecessary risks. The revolutionary fervor of the early Khomeini days is long past, and even Khomeini would not have dreamt of doing anything so close to national suicide...
...Persian culture and history has lived through another two and a half millennia. Persian civilization is one of the oldest in the world. It has created a great religion and influenced many others, including Judaism. Iranians are fiercely proud of that civilization.
To imagine that the present leaders of Iran would even contemplate risking the very existence of Persia out of hatred of Israel is both ridiculous and megalomaniac.
Moreover, throughout history, relations between Jews and Persians have almost always been excellent. When Israel was founded, Iran was considered a natural ally, part of David Ben-Gurion's "strategy of the periphery" – an alliance with all the countries surrounding the Arab world.
The Shah, who was re-installed by the American and British secret services, was a very close ally. Teheran was full of Israeli businessmen and military advisers. It served as a base for the Israeli agents working with the rebellious Kurds in northern Iraq who were fighting against the regime of Saddam Hussein.
After the Islamic revolution, Israel still supported Iran against Iraq in their cruel 8-year war. The notorious Irangate affair, in which my friend Amiram Nir and Oliver North played such an important role, would not have been possible without the old Iranian-Israeli ties.
Even now, Iran and Israel are conducting amiable arbitration proceedings about an old venture: the Eilat-Ashkelon oil pipeline built jointly by the two countries.
If the worst comes to the worst, nuclear Israel and nuclear Iran will live in a Balance of Terror.
Highly unpleasant, indeed. But not an existential menace.
However, for those who live in terror of the Iranian nuclear capabilities, I have a piece of advice: use the time we still have.
Under the American-Iranian deal, we have at least 10 years before Iran could start the final phase of producing the bomb.
Please use this time for making peace.
The Iranian hatred of the "Zionist Regime" – the State of Israel – derives from the fate of the Palestinian people. The feeling of solidarity for the helpless Palestinians is deeply ingrained in all Islamic peoples. It is part of the popular culture in all of them. It is quite real, even if the political regimes misuse, manipulate or ignore it.
Since there is no ground for a specific Iranian hatred of Israel, it is solely based on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. No conflict, no enmity.
Logic tells us: if we have several years before we have to live in the shadow of an Iranian nuclear bomb, let's use this time to eliminate the conflict. Once the Palestinians themselves declare that they consider the historic conflict with Israel settled, no Iranian leadership will be able to rouse its people against us.
For several weeks now, Netanyahu has been priding himself publicly on a huge, indeed historic, achievement.
For the first time ever, Israel is practically part of an Arab alliance.
Throughout the region, the conflict between Muslim Sunnis and Muslim Shiites is raging. The Shiite camp, headed by Iran, includes the Shiites in Iraq, Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen. (Netanyahu falsely - or out of ignorance - includes the Sunni Hamas in this camp.)
The opposite Sunni camp includes Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the Gulf states. Netanyahu hints that Israel is now secretly accepted by them as a member.
It is a very untidy picture. Iran is fighting against the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq, which is a mortal enemy of Israel. Iran is supporting the Assad regime in Damascus, which is also supported by Hezbollah, which fights against the lslamic State, while the Saudis support other extreme Sunni Syrians who fight against Assad and the Islamic State. Turkey supports Iran and the Saudis while fighting against Assad. And so on.
I am not enamored with Arab military dictatorships and corrupt monarchies. Frankly, I detest them. But if Israel succeeds in becoming an official member of any Arab coalition, it would be a historic breakthrough, the first in 130 years of Zionist-Arab conflict.
However, all Israeli relations with Arab countries are secret, except those with Egypt and Jordan, and even with these two the contacts are cold and distant, relations between the regimes rather than between the peoples.
Let's face facts: no Arab state will engage in open and close cooperation with Israel before the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is ended. Even kings and dictators cannot afford to do so. The solidarity of their peoples with the oppressed Palestinians is far too profound.
Real peace with the Arab countries is impossible without peace with the Palestinian people, as peace with the Palestinian people is impossible without peace with the Arab countries.
So if there is now a chance to establish official peace with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States, and to turn the cold peace with Egypt into a real one, Netanyahu should jump at it. The terms of an agreement are already lying on the table: the Saudi peace plan, also called the Arab Initiative, which was adopted many years ago by the entire Arab League. It is based on the two-state solution of the Israeli-Arab conflict.
Netanyahu could amaze the whole world by "doing a de Gaulle" – making peace with the Sunni Arab world (as de Gaulle did with Algeria) which would compel the Shiites to follow suit.
Do I believe in this? I do not. But if God wills it, even a broomstick can shoot.
And on the day of the Jewish Pesach feast, commemorating the (imaginary) exodus from Egypt, we are reminding ourselves that miracles do happen".
Uri Avnery, 04/0415
Enquanto os iranianos negociavam em Lausanne, na Háguia,
a Palestina aderia formalmente à Corte Penal Internacional, como previsto
Na quarta-feira, Saeb Erakat, figura controvertida devido às inúmeras concessões feitas durante as Peace Talks, declarou "Palestine has and will continue to use all legitimate tools within its means in order to defend itself against Israeli colonisation and other violations of international law."
Apesar do direito adquirido, a Palestina terá de esperar as investigações do tribunal que podem durar meses ou anos, dependendo da boa vontade de investigadores e investigados.
Uma ex-membro do ICC, Diana Chehade, explicou que "This is such a heavily politicised case, that the court will have to think hard before taking action against the Israelis. It may be years before we something." Segundo ela, é provável que as investigações preliminares sejam completadas no fim de 2015, mas isto não significa que os palestinos obtenham justiça. Pois, "Based on the principle of complimentarity, the ICC would not investigate if an Israeli judicial institution is investigating a war crime to ICC standards." O que significa concretamente que se tribunais israelenses fingirem que estão investigando os crimes dos quais são acusados, os criminosos ficarão impunes, como sempre. Vide o caso de Rachel Corrie e tantos outros (Blog 25/08/13).
Vale lembrar que desde que a Palestina aderiu ao ICC no comecinho de 2015 que Israel confisca todo o seu dinheiro que passa forçosamente por seus bancos em Tel Aviv, inclusive os impostos que são devidos à Autoridade Nacional Palestina. Começou com US$400 milhões que aumentam progressivamente com os bancos israelenses lucrando com os funcionários públicos palestinos ficarem sem salários.
Na sexta-feira Israel declarou que entregaria parte do dinheiro surrupiado. Mahmoud Abbas reclamou, mas a não ser que mude seu comportamento da noite para o dia, as ameaças serão vãs e não quebrará a promessa de garantir a segurança de Israel na Cisjordânia, feita durante os famigerados Acordos de Oslo que só os palestinos respeitam.
É verdade. Mas este trem é lento e seu cerimonial é pesado.
Primeiro o ministro das Relações Exteriores palestino Riad Malki receberá uma cópia do Estatuto de Roma, o tratado fundador do ICC (que ele conhece de cor e decorado). Segundo, as reclamações são limitadas. Terceiro, a ANP só poderã começar a "reclamar" quando o promotor Fatou Bensouda completar a investigação pré-preliminar começada no dia 16 de janeiro deste ano. Pois Mahmoud Abbas recorreu ao tribunal para que investigue também os crimes cometidos na Cirsjordânia desde junho de 2014, além do massacre de mais de 2.200 palestinos na Faixa de Gaza.
Até agora, o ICC não lançou nenhuma investigação de autoridades israelenses, mas os palestinos estão confiantes. Rejeitam o argumento dos que dizem que os dirigentes de Israel não podem ser julgados no ICC por Israel não ser assinante do Estatuto de Roma. (Nem Israel nem os Estados Unidos. A fim de não poderem ser julgados como mandantes dos crimes cometidos por suas forças armadas, ao contrário de governantes e generais sérvios e africanos que foram parar no banco dos réus por crimes similates aos que Israel e EUA cometem).
Aliás, como Israel não tem como negar seus atos criminosos provados em imagens irrefutáveis, Binyamin Netanyahu está contando ganhar esta batalha jurídico-diplomática no grito, literalmente. Usa suas próprias infrações legais como argumento de defesa: "It's absurd for the ICC to ignore international law and agreements, under which the Palestinians don't have a state and can only get one through direct negotiations with Israel," disse em janeiro quando começou a chantagem de 'confiscar' o dinheiro palestino destinado a uso público.
E por incrível que pareça, Netanyahu está se servindo de tribunais estadunidenses para nocautear os palestinos. Está financiando assitência jurídica às mínimas vítimas de ataques da resistência à ocupação e já conseguiu que júris gringos condenassem a ANP e a OLP (Organização de Libertação da Palestina, composta de todos os partidos nacionais) a pagarem mais de US$650 milhões em perdas e danos.
É incrível como Israel consegue se safar de suas bandidagens e ainda por cima, obter lucro. Só que o condenado é inadimplente, e segundo as próprias palavras de Netanyahu, inexistente. Esse cara é mesmo incoerente. Menos no seu projeto de limpeza étnica.
Enquanto isso, a ocupação continua, violenta e inclemente. E Mahmoud Abbas e seus amigos do Fatah estão mais preocupados em continuar no comando do que com o bem estar de seus compatriotas na Faixa de Gaza.
ISIL seizes palestinian refugee camp Yarmouk, in Syria
ISIL ocupou o campo de refugiados palestino Yarmouk, na Síria,
e centenas de famílias estão à mercê da barbárie e das tramas de al-Bagdadi
Na Cirsjordânia, a Ocupação impõe o Apartheid nas cidades palestinas
"No Christians, no Muslins, Jews only"
Israeli forces abduct at least 21 Palestinians in the West Bank
IDF soldiers clash with demonstrators in the West Bank
No dia 1° de abril, Anonymous ameaça parar o WEB israelense na OpsIsrael
E cumpre a palavra no dia 07 virando Israel de cabeça pra baixo
Pro-Palestinian hackers have targeted Israeli websites following threats from the hacking collective known as Anonymous. The hacking campaign, called #OpIsrael, has been taking place every April 7 in recent years and is a protest against Israeli policies towards the Palestinians. Israel's Computer Emergency Response Team, a civilian cyber security group, said Anonymous attacked a few dozen websites belonging to Israeli musicians and non-profit organisations on Tuesday.
Israeli website Ynetnews reported that the sites hacked included an educational centre and an association for urologists.
No major government websites were affected.
The hackers replaced websites with photos of a Muslim holy site in Jerusalem and of fighters holding the flag of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) group, and posted a message stating the site had been "Hacked by AnonGhost".
A video message by Anonymous said its campaign was responding to "crimes in the Palestinian territories," including last summer's Gaza war.
This is the fourth year in a row that Anonymous has threatened Israel with hacking, and the group again forewarned Israel several days ago.
On April 7 last year, the #OpIsrael campaign targeted hundreds of Israeli government websites. It also published phone numbers and addresses belonging to Israeli officials.
Previous attempts have targeted the prime minister's office and the Israeli army's website, with limited success.
Khalida Jarrar
O marido da advogada, Ghassan Jarrar, contou que "They came this morning at around 1am. There were about 50 or 60 soldiers, both male and female. They smashed the front gate of our home, and then broke into the house. They searched every room, took a lot of documents, stole our computers, and [Khalida’s] mobile. Then they decided to arrest her.”
Um acessor de imprensa do PLC declarou que o sequestro da deputada de 52 anos era “a direct attack on the freedom of Palestinian lawmakers and democracy generally. This is an unlawful abduction, and is representative of the harsh reality of the Israeli occupation."
A IDF ousou declarar que a deputada "has actively supported and encouraged terrorist activities over recent months... [her] detention is based on substantive concerns for the security and safety of the region."
Qual é mesmo a "atividade terrorista" de Khalida? Ela é advogada e como tal fornece assistência jurídica a famílias de compatriotas vítimas dos crimes israelenses. De sequestros/prisões arbitrárias, como no seu caso, aos crimes quotidianos de desapropriações e destruição de lavouras e residências, terrorismo dos soldados e colonos nas casas invadidas de madrugada como no seu caso e checkpoints; vandalismos e assassinatos. Enfim, faz seu trabalho de advogada.
Desde 2006 que Israel vem sequestrando dezenas de deputados e ministros palestinos. Muitos continuam detidos sob acusações absurdas como a de Khalida ou nenhuma. Os afiliados ao Hamas têm sido os mais visados. Khalida não é do Hamas. É de um partido laico de esquerda, o PFLP - Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine que Israel e os EUA etiquetaram de "terrorist organisation" décadas atrás; antes da existência do Hamas, antes da primeira Intifada, quando Habash e Arafat ainda lutavam pelo simples direito de seu povo ter uma Autoridade Palestina.
Khalida é presidente da Comissão dos presidiários políticos do PLC e é diretora do Addameer, um grupo de defesa de Direitos Humanos e Apoio a prisioneiros, baseado em Ramallah.
Até esta data, ignora-se onde Khalida foi levada. Em comunicado de imprensa a Addameer declarou que o sequestro da advogada “constitutes an attack against Palestinian political leaders and Palestinian civil society as a whole.” E exigiu sua liberdade imediata.
Ghassan Jarrar disse que o comandante da tropa de ataque (60 soldados para sequestrar uma mulher, dormindo, de madrugada! Que coragem!!) não explicou porquê sua mulher estava sendo presa, mas ouviu um oficial dizer que ela "refused to leave" quando os soldados ordenaram que evacuasse sua residência para eles a revistarem e vandalizarem.
Desde 1998 que a deputada se encontra em regime de prisão-nacional, ou seja, proibida de deixar a Cisjordânia até para ir à Faixa de Gaza. A única vez que recebeu "autorização" de deixar seu país para ir à Jordânia foi uma batalha. Foi em 2014 quando precisou de um exame cerebral sofisticado. Khalida precisa de anticoagulante porque sofre de problemas sanguíneo e de pressão alta, para os quais tem de ser medicada diariamente. O comandante do batalhão de sequestradores permitiu que levasse seu remédio principal.
Khalida Jarrar ficará em detenção administrativa durante seis meses. Ou seja, sem acusação e sem direito a defesa nem julgamento. Atualmente há 455 presos políticos palestinos nos presídios de Israel no mesmo regime arbitrário.
Israel continua demolindo casas e vidas na Palestina
 |
| Santo Sepulcro |
Neste ano, Israel está dificultando ainda mais aos palestinos cristãos a celebração da Páscoa na Terra Santa por causa da coincidência com a Pessah judia.
This year, Easter festivities are coinciding with the Jewish holiday of Passover. Israeli authorities impose severe restrictions on Palestinians' movement during that time, affecting both Muslims and Christians' access to Jerusalem holy sites.
"Israeli authorities give some permits to Christians during religious holidays," said Fr Jamal Khader, the rector of the Latin Patriarchate Seminary, who described himself as one of the "lucky ones" to have received permission to enter Jerusalem this Easter time.
"But at the same time, the access to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre is restricted and during Pesach [Passover] there are even more restrictions," he said. "Permits are a means of control and this is a violation of our freedom of worship."
Khader said that families from his parish often complain that permits are not given to the entire household, which often means having to drop plans to attend the Jerusalem festivities. Even those with permits cannot always take part in the processions because the Old City is "practically closed", he said.
"Every year when we get here for the procession, we notice that the whole area is empty except for hundreds of soldiers and policemen," he said. "This is a real problem for regular people; it dissuades them from participanting.
Difficulties in reaching holy sites come at a time when Christian leaders concede that the community's numbers are in decline. In 1944, there were some 30,000 Christians living in Jerusalem's Old City, according to official figures. Today that number does not exceed 11,000.
Many Palestinian Christians have complained in the past that they were beaten, shoved and prevented by Israeli forces from entering the Old City during religious holidays. Israeli authorities said they were merely using "crowd-control measures" because of the large number of visitors. This year, the Israeli tourism ministry said it is expecting about 130,000 over the period of Holy Week and Passover.
"We are not happy with the measures by [the Israeli municipality of Jerusalem]," said Archbishop Fouad Twal, the Latin patriarch. "We are afraid of a repetition of last year['s events]. Sometimes I wonder whether the [Israeli] policemen know why they are there - to help or to make our lives more difficult."
Last year, the UN's peace envoy to the Middle East at the time and other high-ranking diplomats were prevented from going through a barricade to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre for the "Holy Fire" procession - a traditional ceremony that takes place a day before Orthodox Easter.
Apesar dos pesares, FELIZ PÁSCOA!! HAPPY EASTERN! JOYEUSES PAQUES! BUONA PASQUA! FROHEN OSTERN! Христос воскрес; С пасхой! صْحًا سَعيدًا!
Apesar dos pesares, FELIZ PÁSCOA!! HAPPY EASTERN! JOYEUSES PAQUES! BUONA PASQUA! FROHEN OSTERN! Христос воскрес; С пасхой! صْحًا سَعيدًا!
RAP News: Israel vs Paletine
"It has become the norm in Europe and the US for any adverse comment about Israel, however mild, to evoke a ferocious counterattack from pro-Israel groups. The fear of provoking these intimidatory reactions has prompted a widespread pre-emptive self-censorship with regard to anything Israeli or Jewish among individuals and organisations seeking to avoid them.
Scarcely any western public organisation, official or newspaper today dares to flout these strictures and pay the price. There are two main reasons for this situation: first, the deliberate conflation of hostility to Israel with that to Jews under the common and pejorative heading of anti-Semitism and second, the striking success of pro-Israel lobbyists in using their influence to stifle criticism of the "Jewish State".
It was a combination of these two factors that prompted Britain's Southampton University's decision to cancel its forthcoming conference, "International law and the State of Israel: legitimacy, responsibility, and exceptionalism".
'Toxic speakers'
I write as one of 52 so-called "toxic" speakers, as the Board of Jewish deputies describes us, who had been slated to participate in the conference, which the press has emotively and inaccurately reported to be about "Israel's right to exist".
In fact, it would have been a ground-breaking event, drawing together a large number of noted domestic and overseas scholars to examine fundamental questions about Israel's establishment and what constitutes its legitimacy.
In a democratic society that respects freedom of speech, these are legitimate subjects of debate, and the conference deserved better than to have been summarily cancelled by the university authorities. On March 30, and at a very late stage in what had been marathon preparations for the conference, the university suddenly withdrew its permission for it to go ahead.
It justified its decision on the dubious grounds of "health and safety", citing the threat of hostile public demonstrations that might have put staff, students and conference participants at risk, even though the Southampton police had stated they were adequately prepared to deal with any such problems.
There is little doubt that the university's action was the result of the pressure placed upon it by intensive pro-Israel lobbying. The Board of Deputies of British Jews, the Jewish Leadership Council and the UK Zionist Federation, which collected 6,400 signatures protesting against the conference, all made representations to the university authorities, asking them to cancel it.
Likewise, the Union of Jewish Students protested. Several MPs, including the conservative MP for Romsey and Southampton, did the same, and the Minister for Communities, Eric Pickles, called the conference a "one-sided diatribe". The conservative peer, Lord Leigh, also expressed his dismay at the conference.
Delegitimising Israel?
Tim Shacking, a mathematics professor at Southampton University, said the conference aimed to "delegitimise Israel" and that he felt "uncomfortable" as a Jew; and a respected former graduate, Dr Andrew Sanezenko, returned his Southampton university degree in protest.
One of the university's major patrons was said to be thinking of withdrawing funding from it, and a solicitor, Mark Lewis, announced he would "look unfavourably" on Southampton graduates applying to his firm.
A delegation of Jewish leaders, including Britain's ambassador to Israel, Mathew Gould, whose inappropriate inclusion should have raised questions about his diplomat's role, met with four university vice-chancellors to discuss the limits of free speech, in clear reference to the Southampton conference.
There are many other examples of this kind of intimidation in the service of Israel. Last year the editor of one of the most respected medical journals in the world, the Lancet, Richard Horton, was made the object of a sustained smear campaign by pro-Israel groups aiming to oust him from his position. He had helped to establish a Lancet-Palestinian health alliance with Ramallah's Bir Zeit University in 2013 to enable Palestinian health workers living under Israeli occupation to publish their research in the journal.
Horton's support for these medical professionals was branded anti-Israel bias, made worse when the Lancet published a letter last July during Israel's war on Gaza signed by 24 leading physicians and scientists supporting Gaza's people and denouncing Israel's attacks on them. The Daily Telegraph headline for September 22, 2014 read: "Lancet hijacked by anti-Israel campaign."
There were demands from the Israeli government for the Lancet letter to be removed, and several Jewish physicians declared they would not submit or review articles for the journal. The Lancet's publisher, Elsevier, was targeted with threats of an intensive boycott campaign against the journal and the large-scale cancellation of subscriptions to it unless Horton was sacked. That has not happened as yet, but it remains a threat.
Cause for alarm
That this formidable array of domestic forces can be assembled so effectively to protect a foreign state, Israel, to the detriment of free speech in a democratic country, should be cause for alarm. The smear of anti-Semitism is the perennial weapon of these pro-Israel lobbyists, and it seems to work every time. That and the real threats to the status and livelihoods of Israel's critics have succeeded in silencing many of them.
The same applies to organisations and institutions. It is past time for this kind of terrorism to be challenged, and in that respect the Southampton conference was an important event. For it would have exposed the shaky foundations on which the Israeli edifice is built and which drives its supporters to ensure that no one finds out.
Israel's "right to exist" is not a taboo subject, and should not be so especially in the context of the cost of its existence to the Palestinian people. No state established on the stolen land and property of another people and their continued oppression has any right to exist.
The best way to end this pro-Israel bullying is to stand up to it, firmly and every time. Southampton University should set a precedent that those in a similar predicament can follow, and reinstate its conference as soon as possible".
Ghada Karmi is a research fellow at the Institute of Arab and Islamic Studies, Exeter University .
Scarcely any western public organisation, official or newspaper today dares to flout these strictures and pay the price. There are two main reasons for this situation: first, the deliberate conflation of hostility to Israel with that to Jews under the common and pejorative heading of anti-Semitism and second, the striking success of pro-Israel lobbyists in using their influence to stifle criticism of the "Jewish State".
It was a combination of these two factors that prompted Britain's Southampton University's decision to cancel its forthcoming conference, "International law and the State of Israel: legitimacy, responsibility, and exceptionalism".
'Toxic speakers'
I write as one of 52 so-called "toxic" speakers, as the Board of Jewish deputies describes us, who had been slated to participate in the conference, which the press has emotively and inaccurately reported to be about "Israel's right to exist".
In fact, it would have been a ground-breaking event, drawing together a large number of noted domestic and overseas scholars to examine fundamental questions about Israel's establishment and what constitutes its legitimacy.
In a democratic society that respects freedom of speech, these are legitimate subjects of debate, and the conference deserved better than to have been summarily cancelled by the university authorities. On March 30, and at a very late stage in what had been marathon preparations for the conference, the university suddenly withdrew its permission for it to go ahead.
It justified its decision on the dubious grounds of "health and safety", citing the threat of hostile public demonstrations that might have put staff, students and conference participants at risk, even though the Southampton police had stated they were adequately prepared to deal with any such problems.
There is little doubt that the university's action was the result of the pressure placed upon it by intensive pro-Israel lobbying. The Board of Deputies of British Jews, the Jewish Leadership Council and the UK Zionist Federation, which collected 6,400 signatures protesting against the conference, all made representations to the university authorities, asking them to cancel it.
Likewise, the Union of Jewish Students protested. Several MPs, including the conservative MP for Romsey and Southampton, did the same, and the Minister for Communities, Eric Pickles, called the conference a "one-sided diatribe". The conservative peer, Lord Leigh, also expressed his dismay at the conference.
Delegitimising Israel?
Tim Shacking, a mathematics professor at Southampton University, said the conference aimed to "delegitimise Israel" and that he felt "uncomfortable" as a Jew; and a respected former graduate, Dr Andrew Sanezenko, returned his Southampton university degree in protest.
One of the university's major patrons was said to be thinking of withdrawing funding from it, and a solicitor, Mark Lewis, announced he would "look unfavourably" on Southampton graduates applying to his firm.
A delegation of Jewish leaders, including Britain's ambassador to Israel, Mathew Gould, whose inappropriate inclusion should have raised questions about his diplomat's role, met with four university vice-chancellors to discuss the limits of free speech, in clear reference to the Southampton conference.
There are many other examples of this kind of intimidation in the service of Israel. Last year the editor of one of the most respected medical journals in the world, the Lancet, Richard Horton, was made the object of a sustained smear campaign by pro-Israel groups aiming to oust him from his position. He had helped to establish a Lancet-Palestinian health alliance with Ramallah's Bir Zeit University in 2013 to enable Palestinian health workers living under Israeli occupation to publish their research in the journal.
Horton's support for these medical professionals was branded anti-Israel bias, made worse when the Lancet published a letter last July during Israel's war on Gaza signed by 24 leading physicians and scientists supporting Gaza's people and denouncing Israel's attacks on them. The Daily Telegraph headline for September 22, 2014 read: "Lancet hijacked by anti-Israel campaign."
There were demands from the Israeli government for the Lancet letter to be removed, and several Jewish physicians declared they would not submit or review articles for the journal. The Lancet's publisher, Elsevier, was targeted with threats of an intensive boycott campaign against the journal and the large-scale cancellation of subscriptions to it unless Horton was sacked. That has not happened as yet, but it remains a threat.
Cause for alarm
That this formidable array of domestic forces can be assembled so effectively to protect a foreign state, Israel, to the detriment of free speech in a democratic country, should be cause for alarm. The smear of anti-Semitism is the perennial weapon of these pro-Israel lobbyists, and it seems to work every time. That and the real threats to the status and livelihoods of Israel's critics have succeeded in silencing many of them.
The same applies to organisations and institutions. It is past time for this kind of terrorism to be challenged, and in that respect the Southampton conference was an important event. For it would have exposed the shaky foundations on which the Israeli edifice is built and which drives its supporters to ensure that no one finds out.
Israel's "right to exist" is not a taboo subject, and should not be so especially in the context of the cost of its existence to the Palestinian people. No state established on the stolen land and property of another people and their continued oppression has any right to exist.
The best way to end this pro-Israel bullying is to stand up to it, firmly and every time. Southampton University should set a precedent that those in a similar predicament can follow, and reinstate its conference as soon as possible".
Ghada Karmi is a research fellow at the Institute of Arab and Islamic Studies, Exeter University .
Inside Story: Who can Save Yarmouk?
Gaza, Israel, os judeus e o "anti-semitismo
Paro por aqui. O Yêmen ficará para outro dia.
Enquanto isso, eis vídeos sobre o assunto.
Enquanto isso, eis vídeos sobre o assunto.
George Galloway on Yemen's invasion
Yemen invasion
Press TV: Debate sobre a invasão do Yemen
Samba enredo Palestina
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário