Protesters repeatedly disrupted the confirmation hearing on Thursday for Trump's pick for U.S. ambassador to Israel, David Friedman. Many of the activists were members of Jewish peace groups. One man even blew a shofar, a traditional Jewish horn, inside the hearing in protest. The progressive Jewish group IfNotNow organized the action. Three of its members were arrested.
In a powerful moment, a Palestinian man stood up holding a large Palestinian flag.
In a powerful moment, a Palestinian man stood up holding a large Palestinian flag.
Meanwhile, in Vienna, Austrian activists disrupted Israeli Apartheid Minister Ayelet Shaked's conference. Ayelet Shaked became globally notorious after The Electronic Intifada published a translation of a post she put on Facebook in July 2014 supporting a call for the genocide of Palestinians.
Nesse ínterim, em Viena, ativistas de direitos humanos intervieram na hasbara que a ultra-sionista ministra israelense do Apartheid Ayelet Shaked, pró-genocídio dos palestinos, estava disseminando em sua mal-vinda visita à capital austríaca.
Nesse ínterim, em Viena, ativistas de direitos humanos intervieram na hasbara que a ultra-sionista ministra israelense do Apartheid Ayelet Shaked, pró-genocídio dos palestinos, estava disseminando em sua mal-vinda visita à capital austríaca.
O véu caiu.
Após a reunião entre Trump e Netanyahu as opções se consolidaram: ou as Nações Unidas tomam as rédeas da solução dos Dois Estados, ou o único Estado prevalece em uma das seguintes formas: um país do Mediterrâneo ao Jordão com cidadãos judeus, cristãos e muçulmanos com direitos iguais, ou um grande Israel sionista com o apartheid declarado e assumido.
Agora os chefes da Autoridade Palestina - Mahmmud Abbas e Salam Fayaad - não conseguirão mais enrolar seus compatriotas mantendo a ilusão de uma pátria autônoma e soberana. E nem conseguirão adiar a última Intifada.
Agora, ou vai ou racha.
Netanyahu insisted that the source of "conflict" is Palestine's refusal to coexist yet only his side is ethnically cleansing & killing the other with impunity.
After the buddies Trump-Netanyahu meeting, options are consolidated and clear: Either the United Nations does its job establishing the Two States, judicially; or there is a One State with equal rights for all in one Palestine or a One Zionist State of Israeli exposed apartheid.
Now Mahmmud Abbas and Salam Fayaad will no longer be able keep the dellusion.
Trump & Netanyahu may have triggered the Ultimate Intifada.
Jonathan Cook: Trump has reminded Palestinians that it was always about one state
Amira Hass: Palestinian security official: Washington establishment understands that Palestinian Authority keeps the peace.
Listen to Tulsi Gabbard (12/02/17)
Em 2016, no dia 19 de dezembro, o fotógrafo turco Burhan Ozbilici, da Associated Press, emergiu das sombras através de uma foto que também deu a volta ao mundo, de um outro atentado.A diferença entre as duas é que a fotografia do fotógrafo brasileiro, de um ato condenával e condenado, não foi premiada. O protagonista do atentado não ficou para a história e sim a vítima da tentativa de assassinato.
Ozbilici captou para a eternidade o criminoso Meylut Mert Altintas após este esavaziar sua arma no corpo do embaixador russo Andrei Karlov em Ankara. Karlov jaz a seus pés perfurado por nove balas enquanto Mert ostenta sua arma, triunfante.
A foto foi vista por mais de 18 milhões de pessoas na internet.
Uma foto que celebra o assassino e desrespeita a vítima do crime.
O fotógrafo turco foi premiado, segundo o júri, por sua "coragem".
O cinegrafista que filmou a cena, mais exposto, na verdade, continua no anonimato.
Nenhum dos dois corria perigo, de fato, já que o terrorista queria justamente o que conseguiu; celebridade.
O cinegrafista filmou até o fim. Até o ex-policial reconvertido em terrorista ser "contido" pelas balas dos seguranças do evento cultural.
O fotógrafo achou que seu trabalho acabara e parou no sucesso do atentado. Se tiver tirado alguma foto do assassino crivado de balas, não foram publicadas.
A moral dessa história amoral é que prevaleceu a mensagem do ódio, de vitória do assassino que pôs fim à vida de um diplomata de carreira, pai de família, que estava intermediando negociações de paz.
A World Press Foundation em Amsterdã avaliou 80.400 fotografias feitas por 5.034 fotógrafos de 125 países.
Por que escolheram logo esta?
“It was a very, very difficult decision, but in the end we felt that the picture of the year was an explosive image that really spoke to the hatred of our times,” disse uma dos jurados.
Tudo na vida tem hora. Burhan Özbilici tem 59 anos. É filho de um intelectual herói de guerra. Trabalha na AP desde 1989 sem ser notado. Foi à entrevista coletiva naquela galeria de arte de Ankara por acaso. Estava voltando para casa e deu uma passada. Lá, foi premiado com a foto de sua carreira já bem andada.
É a terceira vez que a foto de um assassinato recebe o prêmio máximo.
A primeira foi feita por Yasushi Nagao em 1961. Suscitou na época grande debate sobre a moralidade da imagem e críticas sobre a priorização do sensasionalismo em relação à qualidade do trabalho. Questionou-se inclusive violação de privacidade da vítima.
A segunda foi feita por Eddie Adams em 1968. Retratou a execução do chefe de um esquadrão de vingança vietcong, em Saigon. A foto teve um impacto tão grande que marcou o início do fim da guerra civil vietnamita, na qual os Estados Unidos eram, já então, os vilões.
Só que a imagem celebrizada em 2016 não teve nenhuma consequência política. Serviu apenas para dar publicidade a um ato criminoso e ao executante do mesmo.
Não acho que o fotógrafo turco não merece crédito pela foto. Merece. Inclusive pela carreira.
Minha questão não é profissional e sim moral.
Os repórteres fotográficos, de maneira geral, raramente pensam nas consequências de suas imagens. Focam, apertam o botão da câmera, e dane-se o contexto em que a foto foi tirada.
Aliás, quase a maioria absoluta das fotos jornalísticas premiadas deturpam a realidade dos fatos porque fixa o imediato.
Enquanto que o repórter tem de focar na informação dentro de um todo que envolve o onde, como, quando, quem, o quê e o porquê.
O fotógrafo não tem este compromisso com o desenrolar da história. Seu compromisso é com o momento em que um fato ocorre, independente da causa e do resultado.
Tirar a foto é um reflexo natural em um repórter fotográfico.
Portanto, ao tirá-la, faz seu trabalho conscienciosamente.
Portanto, ao tirá-la, faz seu trabalho conscienciosamente.
Mas premiar esse tipo de foto é outra história. É amplificar o ato terrorista dando-lhe uma publicidade adicional, lamentável.
Há fotos que contribuem com algo para a humanidade.
A World Press Photo, sendo uma fundação caritativa, teria de ser um instrumento de conscientização dos males que assolam a humanidade e não um veículo de propaganda de um ato reprovável.
Pois quer queira quer não, a WPP vai dar publicidade ao criminoso e ao crime durante todo o ano de 2017, pois as fotos vencedoras serão exibidas em exposições organizadas em 45 países. Geralmente, são vistas por cerca de quatro milhões de pessoas.
Por que não deram o prêmio de foto-reportagem a Daniel Berehulak? O fotógrafo australiano documentou a campanha de execuções sumárias de suspeitos de tráfico nas Filipinas, ordenada pelo presidente Rodrigo Duarte. Em um mês, Daniel registrou 57 assassinatos em imagem. Um verdadeiro e perigoso trabalho de reportagem.
Será que que não houve questionamento sobre a falta de respeito da vítima exposta na foto porque o diplomata é russo?
Aproveito a oportunidade para mostrar algumas imagens que fotógrafos desconhecidos captaram da perversa ocupação israelense na Palestina, no mesmo ano de 2016.
By the way, talking about photos, one might think of the Internet, and Facebook. I'm not on Facebook because I enjoy life for real and I don't understand the notion of sharing my most precious moments with Mark Zuckerberg's spies, or anybody else, for that matter.
“In recent campaigns – from India across Europe to the United States – we’ve seen the candidate with the largest and most engaged following on Facebook usually wins,” Zuckerberg writes. As though it were a good thing!
Marine Le Pen has 1.2 million Facebook followers; and, here he is, cheerfully envisioning a world in which Facebook is the intermediary between people and their governments. “We can help establish direct dialogue and accountability between people and our elected leaders.”
Será que que não houve questionamento sobre a falta de respeito da vítima exposta na foto porque o diplomata é russo?
Aproveito a oportunidade para mostrar algumas imagens que fotógrafos desconhecidos captaram da perversa ocupação israelense na Palestina, no mesmo ano de 2016.
Demolição de residência em Qabatyia. Abril. Foto de Nedal Eshtayah
Rafah crossing, fronteira de Gaza com o Egito. Maio. Foto de Mohammed Dahman
Qalandya, checkpoint na Cisjordânia. Julho. Foto de Ahmad Al-Bazz
Kufr-Qadum, Cisjordânia. Agosto. Foto de Nedal Eshtayah
Beit Hanoun, Gaza, after Israeli strike. Setembro. Foto de Ashraf Amra
Bailarina palestina acompanhada pelo Trio Joubran, Ramallah. Out. Foto de Shadi Hatem
Qalandya, quotidiano. Dezembro. Foto de Shadi Hatem
Vale do Jordão. Palestina trabalha sob vigilância de tanques da IDF. Foto de Keren Menor
By the way, talking about photos, one might think of the Internet, and Facebook. I'm not on Facebook because I enjoy life for real and I don't understand the notion of sharing my most precious moments with Mark Zuckerberg's spies, or anybody else, for that matter.
Speaking of which, last week, Mark Zuckerberg set out a new mission for his company. “In times like these, the most important thing we at Facebook can do is develop the social infrastructure to give people the power to build a global community that works for all of us,” he says. A global community that “prevents harm, helps during crises and rebuilds afterwards”.
A role that might be more accurately described as this: government. Because that’s what this letter is, a template for Facebook’s role in a new world order. A supranational power that exists above and beyond the nation state. A digital interface between you and everything else: your friends, the news, the world.
But here’s another response: where does that power end? Who holds it to account? What are the limits on it? Because the answer is there are none. Facebook’s power and dominance, its knowledge of every aspect of its users’ intimate lives, its ability to manipulate their – our – world view, its limitless ability to generate cash, is already beyond the reach of any government.
What’s more, Facebook is not just any corporation. It is a surveillance machine. In 2012, researchers from Cambridge University showed that knowing just 10 “likes” a Facebook user had clicked gave you more information on someone than a colleague might know; 150 and you’d know more than their partner. With 300, you’d know more about them than they knew about themselves.
What’s more, Facebook is not just any corporation. It is a surveillance machine. In 2012, researchers from Cambridge University showed that knowing just 10 “likes” a Facebook user had clicked gave you more information on someone than a colleague might know; 150 and you’d know more than their partner. With 300, you’d know more about them than they knew about themselves.
We haven’t even started to think about what that means. It’s only just starting to come to light how the Trump campaign and the Leave campaign may have used that information to microtarget swing voters with highly personalised messages via Facebook ads. Or what it will mean in the future.
“In recent campaigns – from India across Europe to the United States – we’ve seen the candidate with the largest and most engaged following on Facebook usually wins,” Zuckerberg writes. As though it were a good thing!Marine Le Pen has 1.2 million Facebook followers; and, here he is, cheerfully envisioning a world in which Facebook is the intermediary between people and their governments. “We can help establish direct dialogue and accountability between people and our elected leaders.”
To put it another way: a company with no oversight and accountability that uses an algorithm that it allows no one to see is developing an AI that will decide if you are or aren’t a terrorist. What could possibly go wrong? Zuckerberg’s letter is a scary big deal. And yet, in the current news cycle, you may well have missed it. He released it on Thursday, coincidentally the same day on which Donald Trump denounced the press as the enemy of the people. A press whose financial model has been undermined by Google and Facebook. Which, we all have to hope, finds another financial model – and fast.
Bottomline, Facebook is not at the service of humanity or morality. Facebook is a corporation doing what corporations do: making money, grabbing market share, maximising profit. And interfering in people's lives.
BDS
At the White House, Netanyahu followed the pattern he used with Obama: declared support for limited Palestinian statehood, reiterated that settlements are not an obstacle to peace, and required the Palestinians to recognise Israel as a Jewish state. Trump might not fall for it as easily as Obama.Inside Story: Does the Two-State solution still have a future?
It is an international consensus and decision after decades of Israel’s rejection of the one-state democratic formula.
If the Trump administration rejects this policy it would be destroying the chances for peace and undermining American interests, standing and credibility abroad,”
Hanan Ashrawi, senior member of the Palestine Liberation Organisation.
On contact: Chris Hedges & Miko Peled
Shministim
BRASIL
Caros Amigos
Carta Capital
Piauí
The principal fact is that the impact of Israel's illegal settlements goes well beyond their built-up area, as indicates the case study of Elon Moreh.
On Sunday, 15 January 2017, laborers began uprooting olive trees and
leveling land near the Palestinian villages of ‘Azzun and a-Nabi Elyas
in Qalqilya District, under the supervision of Civil Administration (CA)
personnel. This work is being carried out as part of the decision made
by the military and the CA to build a bypass road to replace the section
of Route 55 that runs through a-Nabi Elyas. Route 55 originally served
as the main link between Nablus and Qalqilya and was one of the major
traffic arteries in the West Bank. Over time, as settlements expanded,
it also became essential to settlers, as it connects several large
settlements with Israel’s coastal plains and central region.
The decision to build the bypass road was first made in 1989, with
the goal of sparing settlers the need to drive through the village of
a-Nabi Elyas. However, it was not pursued until September 2013, when the
Civil Administration planning institutions began the planning process.
In October 2015, the project was expedited due to pressure by the
settler leadership: According to Israeli media reports
, Prime Minister Netanyahu promised the heads of the settlement local
councils that the road would be built after they had set up a protest
tent in October 2015, following the attack that killed Naama and Eitam
Henkin.
On 21 December 2015, the head of the Civil Administration issued an
expropriation order for 10.4 hectares of land earmarked for the bypass
road. The order noted that the new road will “serve the public good” and
improve mobility between Nablus and Qalqilya. In March 2016, the
Palestinian village councils and landowners petitioned Israel’s High
Court of Justice (HCJ) against the expropriation, on the grounds that
the road will not serve all residents of the area but only settlers. On
16 November 2016, the HCJ denied the petition after accepting the state’s claim that the road is intended to serve the entire population of the area.
The seizure of the land and uprooting of olive trees have severely
harmed the landowners, who have lost a source of income and a major
financial asset, as well as an open space that served all local
residents for leisure and recreational activities.
Hussni Abu Haniyeh, 69, a married father of seven and resident of
‘Azzun, told B’Tselem in a testimony he gave field researcher Abdulkarim
Sadi on 22 January 2017:
Is rape used as a political tool in Israel to demonize and dehumanize Arabs and Palestinians?”
The Electronic Intifada contributor David Sheen appeared on The Real News Network on Tuesday to discuss this question.
In a recent article
for The Electronic Intifada, Sheen shows how lawmakers in Benjamin
Netanyahu’s ruling coalition try to “deflect attention from sex crime
scandals involving the highest echelons of Israeli society by making
false allegations against Palestinians and other non-Jews.”
Sheen
told The Real News, “Unfortunately, what we see is that in Israel,
instead of the government saying this [rape culture] is a major problem …
what we have is top members of the government committing these crimes.”
Sheen
added, “Sadly the only time it ever gets mentioned by Prime Minister
Netanyahu is if he thinks he can somehow blame rape on non-white,
non-Jewish people, specifically Palestinians and African refugees and
other non-Jewish folk in the country.”
Watch part one of Sheen’s interview above, and the second part here.
Here are related articles by David Sheen for The Electronic Intifada:
BRASIL
O CPJ (Comitê International de Proteção do Jornalista) denunciou na semana passada que O Globo e a Folha de São Paulo receberam ordem de demitir jornalistas que desagradam o governo golpista que ocupa o Planalto.
DIRETAS, JÁ! 
Caros Amigos
Carta Capital
Piauí
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário