Israeli Army Demolishes Four Houses Near Bethlehem

Israeli Army Demolishes Four Houses Near Bethlehem

by George Rishmawi

April 3, 2012 Israeli military bulldozers demolished on Tuesday morning four houses in the town of Beit Jala near the southern West Bank city of Bethlehem Palestinian media sources reported. Residents of Beit Jala said that two bulldozers, accompanied by a number of Israeli military vehicles and police, invaded the neighborhood in the early hours of the morning and bulldozed the houses and removed 55 electricity poles in the Makhrour neighborhood which resulted in a power blackout in the entire neighborhood. A demolished house owner told media that he received a warrant on March 5, and had retained a lawyer to follow up with the issue. He was, however, surprised by the demolition this morning. The same owner added that he found the warrant in front of the door under a small stone. The army claims it sent out warrants in 2005, however, the residents said they have received nothing before March 5 this year. The same owner added that he found the warrant in front of the door under a small stone. On his part, the Mayor of Bethlehem said the municipality is trying to restore the power to the area as a temporary relief for the residents.

ICC Absolves Israeli Lawlessness

ICC Absolves Israeli Lawlessness

by Stephen Lendman

April 4, 2012

Established by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) on July 1, 2002, it's mandated to prosecute individuals for genocide and aggression, as well as crimes or war and against humanity.

Instead, it functions solely as an imperial tool. It supports wealth and power. It targets independent states Washington and other Western nations oppose. In the process, it lets America and rogue NATO powers get away with murder.

Chief prosecutor Jose Luis Moreno Ocampo's complicit in their crimes. Now he's done it again. On April 3, Haaretz headlined, "ICC rejects Palestinian bid to investigate Israeli war crimes during 'Cast Lead' Gaza operation," saying:

On Tuesday, Ocampo rejected the PA's request. His reasoning was spurious. He claimed under the Rome Statute, "only internationally recognized states can join the court." His official statement said:

"(T)he current status granted to Palestine by the United Nations General Assembly is that of 'observer,' not as a 'Non-member State,' (and only) relevant bodies at the United Nations" or group of states that make up the court may decide if Palestinians can become part of the Rome Statute.

"(T)he Office has assessed that it is for the relevant bodies at the United Nations or the Assembly of States Parties to make the legal determination whether Palestine qualifies as a State for the purpose of acceding to the Rome Statute and thereby enabling the exercise of jurisdiction by the Court."

"The Rome Statute provides no authority for the Office of the Prosecutor to adopt a method to define the term 'State.' "

Fact check

Palestine IS a state. Over 140 nations recognize it, well over the required General Assembly's two-thirds majority. In the late 1980s, Francis Boyle drafted Palestine's declaration of independence.

On November 15, 1988, the Palestine National Council (PNC) adopted his Memorandum of Law. It "proclaimed the existence of the new independent state of Palestine."

A de facto UN member, it only lacks de jure status because of Abbas won't seek it. If he tried, it's easily gotten.

Boyle's "CREATE THE STATE OF PALESTINE" Memorandum of Law explained requirements necessary for recognition. They include:

• 
  
• "a determinable (not necessarily fixed) territory;" its borders are negotiable; the new state is comprised of Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem; Palestinians have lived there for millennia; it's their nation state;

• 
  
• a fixed population;

• 
  
• a functioning government; in 1988, Arafat declared the PLO as Palestine's Provisional Government; and

• 
  
• the capacity to enter into relations with other states; over 140 nations recognize Palestine; others haven't because, under occupation, it lacks effective control; still others disagree, saying Israel isn't in control; it's an occupier, an illegal one; on December 15, 1988, the General Assembly recognized Palestine's legitimacy, affording it observer status.

Palestine satisfies all essential membership criteria. Moreover, all UN Charter states (including America and Israel) provisionally recognized Palestine in accordance with UN Charter article 80(1) and League Covenant article 22(4).

Further, as the League's successor, the General Assembly has exclusive legal authority to designate the PLO as the Palestinian peoples' legitimate representative.

The Palestine National Council (PNC) is the PLO's legislative body. It's empowerered to proclaim the existence of Palestine. According to the binding 1925 Palestine Citizenship Order in Council, Palestinians, their children and grandchildren, automatically are citizens. So are diaspora Palestinians. Those living in Israel and Jordan have dual nationalities, and residents of the Occupied Territories remain "protected persons," according to Fourth Geneva, until a final peace settlement is reached.

There's more, including simple steps to gain full de jure UN membership. If properly done, it can't be blocked. The Security Council only recommends admissions. The General Assembly affirms them by a two-thirds vote. If proper procedures are followed, it's rubber stamp certain.

Palestine already has statehood. Ocampo suggesting otherwise reveals his imperial agenda and support for lawlessness. In the future, he said, the ICC could "consider allegations of crimes committed in Palestine, should competent organs of the United Nations or eventually the Assembly of States Parties resolve the legal issue" regarding Palestine's membership status.

In January 2009, Palestinian Justice Minister Ali Khashan recognized the ICC's authority "for the purpose of identifying, prosecuting and judging the authors and accomplices of crimes committed on the territory of Palestine since July 1, 2002."

The ICC considered the possibility. During discussions, Arab League representatives submitted evidence of Israeli war crimes. In July 2011, the PA appealed to the ICC in writing.

Instead of doing his job as international law and his own mandate require, Ocampo again bowed to power. He supported wrong over right. He absolved Israeli crimes.

Moreover, although Israel signed the Rome Statute, it sent UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan the following statement:

"....in connection with the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court....Israel does not intend to become a party to the treaty. Accordingly, Israel has no legal obligations arising from its signature on 31 December 2000. Israel requests that its intention not to become a party....be reflected in the depositary's status lists relating to this treaty."

In other words, Israel wants all rights and privileges the Rome Statute affords but none of its obligations. It's gotten everything it wants, especially from Annan, his successor Ban, Ocampo, and Western leaders. They're replicas of each other. They defile their sworn mandates. They support power, lawlessness, and criminality. They ignore fundamental rule of law justice.

Last year, Ocampo compounded his hypocrisy by illegally indicting and issuing arrest warrants for Gaddafi, his son Saif, and Libya's intelligence chief, Abjullah al-Sanoussi.

Besides charging victims of NATO's war of aggression, Libya wasn't a Rome Statute signatory. As a result, the ICC had no authority to act. Ocampo did anyway. He followed orders. He's an imperial tool. Now he's done it again.

Worse still, he refused to investigate US/NATO Iraq and Libyan war crimes. AfPak ones also since July 1, 2002 when the Rome Statute became effective.

When established, it was hoped victims of genocide and aggression, as well as crimes of war and against humanity, would achieve justice. Instead, they've been subordinated to Western imperial interests. Ocampo's complicity supports them. Victims are punished a second time.

ICJ Rules Against Israel

In July 2004, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled Israel's Separation Wall illegal. It said its West Bank route and associated gate and permit system violated Israel's obligations under international law.

It ordered completed sections dismantled, and "all legislative and regulatory acts relating thereto" repealed or rendered "ineffective forthwith."

It also mandated reparations for the "requisition and destruction of homes, businesses, and agricultural holdings (and) return (of) land, orchards, olive groves, and other immovable property seized."

It obligated member states to reject the illegal construction and demand Israel comply with international law.

Most nations ignored the ruling. Israel defied it and keeps building. When completed, it'll be over 800 km long, twice the length of the Green Line, four times as long as the Berlin Wall, and in some places twice as high on about 12% of stolen Palestinian land.

The ICJ's non-binding ruling called on the Security Council to consider "further action" to halt Wall construction, order sections built dismantled, and compensate affected Palestinians for their loss.

Court President Shi Jiuyong said:

"The court is of the view that the United Nations, and especially the General Assembly and the Security Council, should consider what further action is required to bring to an end the illegal situation resulting from the construction of the wall."

He added that Israel's alleged "military exigencies," "national security," or "public order" needs didn't justify its construction. Continuing it is "tantamount to de facto annexation" and "severely impede(s Palestinian) self-determination."

He also urged "reboubl(ing)" UN efforts to end the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Its continuance he called a threat to world peace.

Washington prevented the Security Council from enforcing the ICJ ruling. However, it stands in contrast to Ocampo repeatedly subordinating his mandate to wealth and power interests.

Instead of prosecuting individuals responsible for genocide and aggression, as well as crimes of war and against humanity, he only targets victims.

Absolving Washington, NATO, and Israel defiles the Court's mandate and makes him a willing imperial accomplice.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

"ICC was a hoax from the start": How the rules were broken to deny justice to Israel’s victims in Gaza

"ICC was a hoax from the start": How the rules were broken to deny justice to Israel’s victims in Gaza

Ali Abunimah

April 4, 2012

The International Criminal Court (ICC) "was a hoax from the start."
So said Michael Mandel, a professor at Osgoode Hall Law School at York University in Toronto, in response to the ICC Prosecutor’s shocking decision yesterday to refuse jurisdiction over Gaza war crimes without even referring the matter to judges.
In comments to the Institute for Public Accuracy, Mandel, author of How America Gets Away With Murder, Illegal Wars, Collateral Damage and Crimes Against Humanity elaborated:

It’s disgraceful but not surprising that the ICC has dismissed Palestine’s complaint against Israel. It sat on the complaint for over three years, always proudly announcing that it was investigating it to give the appearance of impartiality. Meanwhile the ICC jumped to attention in less than three weeks when the US government, which is not a signatory to the treaty, wanted to go to war against Libya, justifying Western aggression with bogus charges against the Libyan regime.

Referring to Luis Moreno Ocampo, the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Mandel said:

Ocampo and company have been busy putting Africa on trial for crimes aided, abetted and exploited by the rich countries, while the US government killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and tens of thousands of Afghans, and Israel has been committing Nuremberg’s 'supreme international crime’ of aggression against the Palestinians for 45 years.

Amnesty International presses for reconsideration

Yesterday Amnesty International strongly condemned as "dangerous" and "political" the decision by the ICC Prosecutor to refuse to investigate war crimes committed in the course of Israel’s 2008-2009 attack on the Gaza Strip, on the grounds that Palestine is not a "state."
Amnesty stated that the determination as to whether the ICC had jurisdiction is one that had to be made by the judges, not by prosecutors.
Today, the human rights organization has gone even further, issuing a detailed "Questions and Answers"{BELOW} document explaining why the ICC prosecutor’s decision is incorrect and should be reconsidered.
At the heart of the document, Amnesty explains why it has taken such a strong stance:

Given that access to justice for victims of war crimes by both sides is at stake, Amnesty International is calling for an independent judicial determination of the issue by the ICC judges, rather than a political determination by external bodies where the matter will likely remain unresolved indefinitely while victims continue to be denied justice.
Furthermore, delegating this decision to a political body undermines the vital independence of the Court and exposes the ICC to political influence over justice issues.
The Office of the Prosecutor’s position establishes another a major barrier to justice for the victims and fails to address the fact that the Prosecutor has yet to seek an independent judicial determination from the Pre-Trial Chamber on the questions surrounding the ICC’s jurisdiction in this situation, despite the fact that the preliminary examination has been ongoing for more than three years.

"A dark day"

Meanwhile, the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR), which has spearheaded legal efforts to bring justice for Palestinian victims of war crimes, condemned the ICC prosecutor’s decision, calling it a "dark day for international justice."
PCHR said the "ICC Prosecutor has completely failed to address this issue in an appropriate manner," and had exceeded its powers in deciding for itself whether Palestine was a "state" for the purposes of ICC action.
In contrast to the strong stances of PCHR and Amnesty International, it is notable that other human rights groups, including B’Tselem and Human Rights Watch have so far remained silent about the ICC prosecutor’s action.
There’s no doubt that the politically-motivated decision of the ICC Prosecutor is, and is intended to be, an obstacle on the path to justice for Palestinians. Even worse, it may serve as a green light to Israel to commit even more crimes fully assured of international complicity and impunity.
-------------------------------------------
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS


AI index: MDE 15/018/2012
4 April 2012

Amnesty International’s response to the ICC Office of the Prosecutor’s statement
that it cannot investigate crimes committed during the Gaza conflict

On 3 April 2012, the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an update on its preliminary examination of the situation in Palestine. This preliminary examination was initiated after the Palestinian Authority (PA) submitted a declaration to the ICC in January 2009, in the aftermath of the 22-day conflict in Gaza and southern Israel, to determine whether the ICC could open an investigation into crimes committed during that conflict. The Office of the Prosecutor concluded that it is unable to proceed with investigating and prosecuting these crimes unless the relevant United Nations bodies (in particular, the Secretary General and General Assembly) or the ICC Assembly of States Parties (made up of 121 states that have ratified the
Rome Statute of the ICC (Rome Statute)) decide that Palestine qualifies as a state for the purpose of acceding to the Rome Statute (see: http://www.icc-cpi.int/NR/rdonlyres/C6162BBFFEB9-4FAF-AFA9-836106D2694A/284387/SituationinPalestine030412ENG.pdf ).

In response, Amnesty International issued a press release (copied at the end of this document) criticizing the decision and arguing that the Prosecutor should instead seek a judicial ruling on the issue from the ICC’s Pre-Trial Chamber.

These Questions and Answers provide additional background information to explain Amnesty International’s position.

Neither the PA nor Israel have ratified the Rome Statute, and the UN Security Council has not referred the situation to the ICC. Doesn’t the ICC lack jurisdiction in any case?

States that have not ratified the Rome Statute have the ability under Article 12(3) of the statute to issue a declaration to the ICC accepting its jurisdiction over certain crimes committed in its territory by anyone, regardless of nationality, and committed by its nationals elsewhere. The PA issued such a declaration to the ICC on 22 January 2009 – almost immediately after a ceasefire ended the devastating conflict – accepting its jurisdiction over crimes “committed on the territory of Palestine since 1 July 2002.” This declaration would potentially cover crimes under international law committed by both sides during the Gaza-Israel conflict from 27 December 2008 to 18 January 2009. Amnesty International documented evidence that war crimes were committed
by both Israeli forces and Palestinian armed groups during the conflict (see Operation ‘Cast Lead’: 

22 Days of Death and Destruction,

http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/MDE15/015/2009/en ).

Similarly, Cote d’Ivoire, which has not ratified the Rome Statute, made a declaration accepting the
jurisdiction of the ICC on 18 April 2003.

Why must Palestine be determined to be a state in order for the ICC to proceed with an
investigation?


The ability to accept the jurisdiction of the ICC under Article 12(3) can only be exercised by a
“state.” The validity of the PA’s declaration depends on whether Palestine can be considered a
state within the meaning of the Rome Statute and this must be established before an ICC
investigation can proceed on the basis of the declaration.

Does Amnesty International think that Palestine is a state?

Amnesty International does not take a position on the question of whether Palestine is a state. As
a human rights organization, our concern is respect for the human rights of Palestinians and
Israelis, including access to justice, truth and reparation.

If Amnesty International takes no position on Palestinian statehood, why is it critical of the Office
of the Prosecutor’s statement?

Although Amnesty International takes no position on whether Palestine is a state, it recognizes
that the question is central to whether the ICC has jurisdiction over crimes committed during the
Gaza-Israel conflict on the basis of the PA’s declaration.

Given that access to justice for victims of war crimes by both sides is at stake, Amnesty
International is calling for an independent judicial determination of the issue by the ICC judges,
rather than a political determination by external bodies where the matter will likely remain
unresolved indefinitely while victims continue to be denied justice.

Furthermore, delegating this decision to a political body undermines the vital independence of the
Court and exposes the ICC to political influence over justice issues.

The Office of the Prosecutor’s position establishes another a major barrier to justice for the victims and fails to address the fact that the Prosecutor has yet to seek an independent judicial determination from the Pre-Trial Chamber on the questions surrounding the ICC’s jurisdiction in this situation, despite the fact that the preliminary examination has been ongoing for more than three years.

Why does Amnesty International oppose the UN or the ICC Assembly of States Parties determining whether Palestine qualifies as a state?

Amnesty International does not oppose political processes that establish statehood. However, in this case, the issue of whether Palestine is a “state” is disputed and is unlikely to be resolved by UN bodies expediently. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas submitted an application for full UN membership for the State of Palestine to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on 23 September
2011, but the UN Security Council has yet to vote on the matter. The issue has effectively been put on hold, due in large part to the opposition of the US government. While the Israeli government and some legal scholars argue that Palestine does not meet the requirements of statehood, a number of leading international law experts have expressed the view that the Palestinian Authority is entitled to make such a declaration under Article 12(3) of the Rome Statute and that the ICC judges should determine its validity.

Furthermore, the Office of the Prosecutor’s basis for assessing the need for the United Nations or the ICC Assembly of States Parties to make the determination is flawed. The statement argues that the United Nations or the ICC Assembly of States Parties need to determine that "Palestine is a state for the purpose of acceding to the Rome Statute and thereby enabling the exercise of jurisdiction by the Court in accordance with Article 12 (1)". A broad approach has been taken to accession of the Rome Statute, including the acceptance of the Cook Islands accession, even though it is not a United Nations member state. The approach largely relies on the practice of the


UN General Assembly considering any cases of uncertainty as to whether a state is recognised as such for the purpose of depositing an instrument of ratification. It must be noted that the Palestinian Authority did not attempt to become a state party to the Rome Statute by lodging an instrument of accession, but rather made a declaration under Article 12(3) accepting the ICC’s jurisdiction. The question of ICC’s jurisdiction is distinct from the ability to accede to the Rome Statute and the ICC judges, not an external political body, are best suited to resolve it.

Why does Amnesty International support a judicial determination on the issue?

The interpretation of the Rome Statute is the role of the judges. The key issue is whether the Palestine is a state within the meaning of the Rome Statute. Therefore a judicial determination by an independent panel of judges who have expertise in international law and the Rome Statute could promptly resolve the issue of whether or not the Palestine qualifies as a state for the purposes of Article 12(3), and thus whether the PA declaration accepting the jurisdiction of the ICC is valid.

On what basis could the ICC judges make a judicial determination?

The ICC Pre-Trial Chamber is currently the only judicial body that can conduct such a legal
process. Article 19(3) of the Rome Statute states: “[t]he Prosecutor may seek a ruling from the
Court regarding a question of jurisdiction or admissibility.” However, as the wording suggests, the
process can only be commenced by the Prosecutor. As he has yet to seek a ruling, the ICC judges
have not been able to consider the issue.

How long has Amnesty International been calling for the Prosecutor to seek a ruling of the Pre-Trial Chamber?

Amnesty International first called for the Prosecutor to seek a ruling of the Pre-Trial Chamber in
September 2010, when the organization determined that neither the Israeli authorities nor the
Hamas de facto administration had conducted effective national investigations into the crimes
committed during the Gaza conflict (see: Time for international justice solution for Gaza conflict
victims ( http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/MDE15/021/2010/en ). Most recently, our calls to
the ICC Prosecutor were repeated in: Palestinian Authority: The Palestinian bid for UN
membership and statehood recognition ,
( http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/MDE21/003/2011/en ) .

What would be the benefit if the ICC has jurisdiction?

If the PA’s declaration is found to be valid, it could provide access to justice and reparation before
the ICC for both Palestinian and Israeli victims who are being denied a remedy by the local
authorities. A finding that the ICC has jurisdiction could also prompt Israel and the Hamas de
facto administration to conduct effective national investigations and, if sufficient admissible
evidence is found, prosecute suspected perpetrators, as Amnesty International has called on them
to do since the conflict ended.

Why does Amnesty International call the Prosecutor’s statement “dangerous”?

There are two reasons for this:

· Firstly, by making a non-judicial finding that the ICC cannot act without a determination by the United Nations or the ICC Assembly of States Parties that the Palestinian Authority is a state, the Office of the Prosecutor is sending a message to those who committed crimes under international law that they are currently beyond the reach of international justice. Such impunity perpetuates an environment where human rights violations by all sides can continue, and increases the risk of further civilian casualties. Palestinian armed groups continue to fire indiscriminate rockets into Israel, and the Israeli military continues to conduct indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks in the Gaza Strip (see, for example, All sides must protect civilians in Gaza and Israel following ceasefire announcement , http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/MDE15/014/2012/en).

· Secondly, the Office of the Prosecutor’s decision to form its own position in favour of a political determination, rather than seeking a judicial ruling by the judges, creates the danger that the Office of the Prosecutor will be subject to allegations of political bias and failing to act independently by relying on external political bodies to determine its jurisdiction. This could threaten the credibility of the ICC, especially at a time when the ICC is being criticized for focussing solely on Africa and avoiding more politically challenging situations.

Now that the Prosecutor has made this statement, what is Amnesty International calling for?

Despite its recent statement, the Office of the Prosecutor has not closed its preliminary examination into the situation in Palestine and therefore remains seized of the matter. On this basis, Amnesty International is calling on the Office of the Prosecutor to reconsider the position in its statement, and is urging the Prosecutor again to seek a judicial ruling on the jurisdiction of the ICC in this situation.

What other steps has Amnesty International called for to achieve justice, truth and reparation for victims of the 2008-2009 Gaza-Israel conflict?

Most recently, Amnesty International called on the UN General Assembly to reconsider the report of the UN Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict at its 66 th session, as recommended by the UN Human Rights Council in March 2011. Amnesty International urged the General Assembly to refer the report (also known as the “Goldstone report”) to the Security Council with the
recommendation that it refer the Gaza situation to the ICC Prosecutor pursuant to Article 13(b) of the Rome Statute. Should the Security Council make such a referral, the ICC Prosecutor could open an investigation into crimes committed during the conflict without any further ruling on the validity of the PA declaration. The General Assembly did not take action on the matter during its
66th session, and Amnesty International is not aware of any initiative of the Security Council to
debate the issue.

Amnesty international has also called on all states to exercise universal jurisdiction over crimes under international law, including those documented in the 2008-2009 Gaza conflict. States should investigate and, if sufficient admissible evidence is found, prosecute crimes under international law committed during the conflict before their national courts, regardless of the nationality of the victims or suspects.
---------------------------------------

Gaza - Occupied Lives: No benzene, no livelihood

Gaza - Occupied Lives: No benzene, no livelihood

The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR)

Madelene Kollab on the beach of Gaza city April 4, 2012 Despite Israel’s imposition of illegal restrictions which confine fishers to within 3 nautical miles of the shore, fishing remains one of the major pillars of the Gazan economy. At present there are approximately 8,000 fishers working in the entire Gaza Strip, including 3,500 who are registered by the authorities. Of them, Madelene Kollab, 18, is the only woman. She fishes sardine and squid with a small engined boat, a fishing rod and a net inherited by her father from her grand father, who were also fishers.  Madelene started fishing when she was 13 years old after her father, Mohamed, suffered from paralysis. As she was the eldest of four children, Madelene was forced to continue her father’s work to ensure the family livelihood. "I used to fish with my father since I was 6 years old. Now, together with my brother Kayed [17], I continue fishing to guarantee my family’s subsistence. However, the difficult situation of the sea due to the Israeli blockade, does not allow us to earn enough to cover our needs. The richest area for fishing is located beyond 3 nautical miles, however the Israelis prohibit us from working there. As a result, we are forced to rely on support from the Ministry of Social Affairs. We [fishers] do not have anything to do with politics or terrorism we just want to make a living from the sea. I wish Israel would allows us to fish freely in our waters."   Madelene Koollab on the beach of Gaza city with her colleagues Madelene wakes at 6 a.m. every morning to collect the fish caught in her fishing net overnight, then she returns to the sea at 4 p.m. where she fishes until 7 or 8 p.m. Madelene’s work is well-known amongst the other Gazan fishers. On Thursday, 5 April 2012, she will receive an award for the 'Best sea rescuer’ by the Sea Rescuers association. "I love my work," she says, "the sea is my life. It is my only source of income." In January 2011, due to an unreliable supply and high costs, the authorities in the Gaza Strip stopped importing industrial fuel from Israel. Since then the Gaza Strip has relied on inherently unreliable smuggled fuel from Egypt. In mid February, following a shortage of fuel supplies in Egypt, the Egyptian government decided to halt distribution to the Gaza Strip, creating a fuel crisis, which has affected all aspects of life in the Gaza Strip, including the ability of fishers to work. Before the fuel crisis started, Madelene used to take her boat everyday from the Northern part of Gaza city to the Port of Gaza. In normal conditions, she used to spend an average of 20-25 litres of benzene a day. When the crisis erupted she was forced to limit her daily travel distances, as the effect of the closure on the fishing activities restricted her ability to afford the prices of benzene. By suppressing the visits to the Port, she managed to reduce her benzene consumption to 10 litres a day. However, for the last 3 weeks she has been unable to afford benzene. "There is a huge shortage of benzene and when you find some, the cost is very high. In the last weeks, the prices have increased from 4 to 8 NIS per litre. Considering that even before the benzene crisis we could barely cover the costs of fishing, now we found ourselves in an extremely difficult situation." As a coping mechanism, Madelene operates her boat by rowing. "Through this system, we cannot go far from the shore where the fish population is minor affecting our fishing ability. For instance, while I use to catch between 3 to 4 kg a day, now I only get 1.5 kg." The International Covenant of Economic Social and Cultural Rights recognises the right to work.  Palestinian governments in the Gaza Strip and in the West Bank are severely endangering this, and other rights such as the right to an adequate standard of living, health and education, while they fail to find a solution to the fuel and benzene crisis. In addition to the obligations contained in the said covenant, Israel, as the Occupying Power is also under an obligation to ensure the maintenance of public order and civil life in the Gaza Strip. Israel’s continuing closure of the Gaza Strip is internationally recognised as a prohibited form of collective punishment.

Israel Presses US for Another $700 Million in Military Aid

Israel Presses US for Another $700 Million in Military Aid

Jason Ditz

Funding Needed for Missile Defense Israeli Military Felt Wasn't Worth Paying For

April 4, 2012

The Israeli government has reportedly submitted a formal request for the US to agree to an additional $700 million in military funding, above and beyond the massive amount already allocated, to pay for the Iron Dome and Magic Wand missile defense systems.

This request is above and beyond the money the Pentagon was already seeking for Israel’s Iron Dome system, as the short range missiles, which were largely unsuccessful during the recent Gaza Strip attacks. The Israeli government wants to expand the number of batteries available.
The Iron Dome system was initially defunded by the Israeli military in 2010, when they decided it was not cost effective. The US immediately approved full funding for it. Now, the US is liable to be on the hook for the Magic Wand system as well.
Though official statements from the US have not been made on the new request, reports say that the US is likely to make the $700 million a de facto bribe, aimed at convincing Israel to delay its attack on Iran just a little longer.

Jason Ditz

 

Funding Needed for Missile Defense Israeli Military Felt Wasn't Worth Paying For

April 4, 2012

The Israeli government has reportedly submitted a formal request for the US to agree to an additional $700 million in military funding, above and beyond the massive amount already allocated, to pay for the Iron Dome and Magic Wand missile defense systems.

This request is above and beyond the money the Pentagon was already seeking for Israel’s Iron Dome system, as the short range missiles, which were largely unsuccessful during the recent Gaza Strip attacks. The Israeli government wants to expand the number of batteries available.
The Iron Dome system was initially defunded by the Israeli military in 2010, when they decided it was not cost effective. The US immediately approved full funding for it. Now, the US is liable to be on the hook for the Magic Wand system as well.
Though official statements from the US have not been made on the new request, reports say that the US is likely to make the $700 million a de facto bribe, aimed at convincing Israel to delay its attack on Iran just a little longer.

Israel causes $66 million worth of damage to EU-funded aid projects

Israel causes $66 million worth of damage to EU-funded aid projects

Charlotte Silver

Israeli forces have destroyed EU-funded ambulances and other humanitarian aid projects since 2001. (Ashraf Amra / APA images) April 4, 2012 When Europe Develops, and Israel Destroys RAMALLAH (IPS) - The European Commission has released a document that lists projects it funded that were destroyed or damaged by the Israel Defence Forces between May 2001 and October 2011. The list documents 82 such instances, amounting to a monetary loss of 49.2 million euro, 30 million of which came directly from European aid. British Member of the European Parliament, Chris Davies, released the list following his inquiry to the European Commission. Davies subsequently published the findings on his webpage where he stated that the list was "the most detailed response I have ever received from the European Commission." The recently published record is yet another indicator of the disregard with which Israel treats its European allies’ activities in the occupied Palestinian territories. Last year, it was calculated that Israeli-imposed travel restrictions cost international aid organizations 4.5 million dollars a year. Davies notes that while the economic damage is not significant in the larger context of the conflict, the Commission’s meticulous record is illuminating. The bulk of the damage was inflicted during the years of the second Intifadah (uprising, 2000-2005) as well as Israel’s attack on the besieged Gaza Strip in the winter of 2008-2009. The projects range in scale. In the winter of 2001, Gaza’s International Airport was devastated, costing contributing countries (Spain, Sweden and Germany) 9.5 million euros. Smaller-scale but significant destruction also incurred. For example, during the second Intifadah, Israeli attacks destroyed a fleet of Red Crescent ambulances financed by the European Commission. Israel’s attack on Gaza in the winter of 2008-2009 destroyed nearly two million euros worth of European- funded projects, including several waste management and water treatment plants. Apart from European-funded projects, demolition of homes, schools and water collecting devices in Area C of the West Bank occurs on a regular basis. Sixty-two percent of the West Bank is classified as Area C - meaning it comes under full Israeli military and civilian control. Area C is home to 150,000 Palestinians and 300,000 Israeli settlers. The IDF and Israeli Civil Administration maintain the right to demolish any structure built without a permit. International, Israeli and Palestinian human rights organisations all concur that building permits are virtually impossible to acquire. In 2011 alone, 746 Palestinian structures and homes and 46 rainwater collective devices were destroyed by Israeli forces. Hundreds more homes throughout Area C are awaiting demolition. Palestinians and solidarity activists agree that it is crucial to help Palestinians living in Area C to stay on their land. One such organisation, the Jordan Valley Solidarity Project, has taken the saying "To exist is to resist" as their guiding principle - helping to build homes, schools and other needed structures, in spite of the constant risk of demolition - in order to help Palestinians stay on the land. The European Commission’s list suggests that member states of the EU are not funding projects in Area C, even though it is arguably the most needy population. This was confirmed in a study conducted by Birzeit University last year on the effectiveness of development aid, which included interviews with both donors and recipients of aid. The study found that the policy of most international aid agencies was to not build without a permit because it would constitute a political confrontation to the occupation, in addition to being laden with bureaucracy. There are exceptions to this. There are two cases of the Spanish and German governments funding solar panels in villages Area C of the Hebron hills. However, in news that stunned many, both projects received demolition orders this year. Speaking critically of the way aid has been given to the Palestinian territories, representative from the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA), Peter Lundbergh said, "Development should help Palestinians stay on their land; too many have left Area C." (END)

New Settlement Outpost Secretly Constructed in Jerusalem

New Settlement Outpost Secretly Constructed in Jerusalem

Palestine News Network

April 4, 2012

On Tuesday 3rd April, Head of the Committee for the Defense of Silwan, Fakhri Abu Diab, revealed the Israeli authorities final settlement outpost that was constructed under the seven arches hotel in Jabal al-Zaytoun (mountain of Olives), which overlooks al-Aqsa Mosque and the Old City of Jerusalem.

Israeli authorities finished the final preparations of the outpost and took some photographs of the units. Abu Diab said that Israeli Security Services was running a number of offices in this region, but they turned the offices to a settlement outpost that they secretly constructed at night, in the most sensitive area in Jerusalem.

He also said that the Israeli Security Services immediately started to install cameras to monitor the settlement outpost and to watch the nearby places such as; al-Aqsa mosque, Mercy cemetery and Silwan village.

Furthermore he said that these settlement units, that take the shape of fixed caravans, are easy to expand on the lands of Jabal al-Zaytoun and they can be utilized to control the Old City of Jerusalem and its surroundings.

Israel Plans Theft of 10% More West Bank Land

Israel Plans Theft of 10% More West Bank Land

by Stephen Lendman

April 4, 2012

Israel occupies Gaza, East Jerusalem, and the West Bank illegally. Its settlements, closed military zones, tourist sites, and commercial areas control over 40% of the West Bank, including its most valued resource rich parts - notably water.

Its expanding settlements steal more. When completed, its Separation Wall will control about 12% of the West Bank. In 2004, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled it illegal.

It said its route and associated gate and permit system violate international law. It ordered completed sections dismantled, and "all legislative and regulatory acts related thereto" repealed or rendered "ineffective forthwith."

It also mandated reparations for the "requisition and destruction of homes, businesses, and agricultural holdings (and) to return the land, orchards, olive groves, and other immovable property seized."

In addition, it mandated member states reject the illegal construction and demand Israel comply with international law. Few have. Israel defied the ruling. Construction continues.

When completed, it'll extend over 800km. It'll be twice the length of the Green Line, four times as long as the Berlin Wall, and in some places twice as high. Palestinian communities are destroyed. Many are isolated.

Thousands of Palestinians are displaced. Weekly protests are held. Israeli security forces confront them violently. Land theft continues daily. Israel wants all valued areas and Jerusalem as its exclusive capital.

Palestinian rights don't matter. Neither do international laws or ICJ rulings. Only what it wants counts. That's how police states rule - through barrel of a gun ruthlessness against opposition.

On March 30, Haaretz reported new information in an article headlined, "Israel Defense Ministry plan earmarks 10 percent of West Bank for settlement expansion," saying:

"For years Israel’s Civil Administration has been covertly locating and mapping available land in the West Bank, and naming the parcels after existing Jewish settlements, presumably with an eye toward" expanding them.

Through Freedom of Information Law requests, anti-settlement activist Dror Etkes found out. In some areas, parcel boundaries coincide with Separation Wall routes. State authorities claim national security necessity.

False! It's land theft, nothing else. Moreover, Civil Administration maps and figures "suggest the barrier route was planned in accordance with the available land in the West Bank." It's near settlements to expand them.

"Available," of course, means portions Israel wants to steal, besides all previously expropriated.

In total, another 569 parcels were chosen. They include about 620,000 dunams, or about 10% of the entire West Bank. Stealing it along with Separation Wall land when completed and what Israel now controls, comprises well over 50% of the territory with more added daily. It continues en route toward leaving Palestinians isolated in separate bantustans on worthless scrubland.

Haaretz said Israel's Civil Administration wants Shvut Rahel, Rehelim, Hayovel, Migron, and other outposts legalized. Its own High Court ruled Migron illegal. Months ago it ordered dismantling and its residents evicted. If challenged, it suggests similar rulings against all 100 unauthorized outposts would follow.

Of course, all Israeli settlements are illegal, as well as 12 annexed Jerusalem neighborhoods and East Jerusalem settler enclaves. International law is clear and unequivocal. Fourth Geneva's Article 49 states:

"The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies."

Israel spurns it, other international laws, and its own when it comes to Palestine.

Etkes thinks settlers knew Civil Administration plans when building outposts. If so, it shows government complicity in what it calls "unauthorized."

Maps obtained, in fact, name communities that don't exist. They include:

• 
  
• Shlomzion on Palestinian Aqraba community land:

• 
  
• Lev Hashomron in Kafr Haja;

• 
  
• Mevo Adumin in Azariya and Abu Dis; and

• 
  
• Mitzpeh Zanoah and Mitzpeh Lahav in south Mount Hebron.

Maps marked 81 sites on 114,000 dunams in Palestinian controlled areas A and B. The remaining 506,000 dunams are in Israeli-controlled Area C. Over 90% of the land is east of the Separation Wall.

According to Dror Etkes, it "means the administration flouts the peace process, which is based on the two-state principle." Stealing all valued land excludes the possibility. Of course, Israel always rejected Palestinian independence and does now.

Most earmarked Area C areas are classified state lands, despite all of them belonging to Palestine. About 7,600 dunams are called "Jewish land" and 12,800 remain unclassified.

In response to information now known, Israel's Civil Administration said maps are a data bank. Occasionally they're updated, and don't reflect settlement expansion plans. Haaretz exposed CA lies.

On March 30, a Haaretz editorial headlined, "Listen to Marwan Barghouti," saying:

"Jerusalem would do well to listen to" his prison call to resist Israeli repression, boycott its products, and stop negotiating with an all take/no give state.

Before Palestine's second Intifada began, he warned it was coming. Oppressed people only take so much before reacting. "His words fell on deaf ears. No one heeded his warning," and Palestine's more brutally repressed today than then, especially besieged Gaza.

"But anyone who thinks, like the government does, that this situation can go on forever undisturbed, is leading into another cycle of violence."

Barghouti always endorsed nonviolent opposition. "(W)e should listen to him before it's too late. If a third" Intifada erupts, Israel won't "be able to feign surprise. Barghouti warned us."

Israel Confronts Peaceful Land Day Demonstrations Violently

Friday, March 30, was Land Day. Annually, Palestinians commemorate the March 1976 killing of six Israeli Arabs, injuring another 100, and arresting hundreds more. They were nonviolently protesting land theft.

Earlier this year, organizers called for peaceful rallies against "the policies and practices of the racist Zionist state." Solidarity protests were expected in 80 or more countries.

Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh said "(w)hen crowds from 80 countries move towards Jerusalem, they send a strong message to the Israeli occupation that no one can accept what they are doing in Jerusalem."

Israel confronts peaceful demonstrations and gatherings violently. Friday was no exception. Haaretz said soldiers and police attacked protesters in Bethlehem, Ramallah, Qalandiyah, at various checkpoints, and other locations throughout the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza.

Struck by a tear gas canister near Bethlehem's Qubbeh checkpoint, Ali Arafe's hospitalized in critical condition. So were others with bullet wounds and injuries from weapons fired at close range.

Thousands gathered around Jerusalem checkpoints, as well as Gaza, Lebanon and Jordan border areas.

One death was reported. Scores were hurt. Soldiers used tear gas, stun grenades, rubber bullets, live fire, sound bombs, a "scream" acoustic device, water cannons, and foul-smelling skunk water so concentrated a tiny drop can affect a 2,000 square foot house for days. Palestinians were also beaten.

Reporting live, Maan News said Adham Abu Salmiya was killed in northern Gaza. Demonstrations throughout the Strip continued all day. From border areas, Israeli forces used live fire. Protester Ebaa Rezeq said "(p)eople are falling here like flies. Blood everywhere."

Numerous arrests were made. Critical injuries were reported. "Medics said the Israeli army used live fire to prevent protesters from approaching frontier barriers." Israel lied claiming soldiers fired warning shots. Ebaa Rezeq said she saw them open fire on a crowd. At least six injuries resulted.

One Palestinian youth was severely injured when struck in the face by a tear gas canister fired directly at him from close range. The Red Crescent reported other serious injuries, requiring hospitalization.

A Final Comment

The Al-Zaytouna Centre for Studies & Consultations presented its 11th report in its "Am I Not Human" series. This one's a short book titled, "The Suffering of the Palestinian Patient under the Israeli Occupation."

It addresses health sector abuse causing Palestinian suffering. Vast differences exist between what Jews and Arabs get.

Fatima Itani and Atef Daghlas presented a detailed analysis of healthcare under occupation. They included case study examples of suffering "exacerbated by Israeli obstacles and the difficult conditions of Palestinian health care institutions."

They also addressed checkpoint and Separation Wall delays, as well as obstacles pregnant Palestinian women face reaching hospitals and clinics in time to give birth. They don’t always make it and must manage on their own with whatever help they can get. Some die. All suffer needlessly.

Gaza's deteriorated sector's also highlighted. Siege causes critical shortages of virtually everything needed to deliver care. Since mid-2007, 380 Palestinians died.

The book graphically discusses vast differences between Jewish and Palestinian care in terms of resources allocated, facilities available, and treatment adequacy because of what's available to provide it.

Lawless "experimentations performed on Palestinian patients in Israeli hospitals" are explained. Those affected include children, the elderly and mentally ill, and others abusively treated. "It reveals the testing of serious drugs on Palestinian prisoners and the illegal trade of Palestinian human organs from corpses to treat Israeli patients, including soldiers."

"This conduct fails to respect international covenants which regulate medical experimentations on patients."

In addition, the book covers Israel's willful prisoner neglect. They're denied proper treatment. Sickness and disease results even after being released. Since 1967, dozens of Palestinian prisoners died in prisons. Many others when freed.

Israel obstructs foreign travel for treatment, as well as the ability of Gazans to get it in West Bank or East Jerusalem hospitals able to provide what Gaza facilities can't. Getting permission isn't easy. It often requires spying on friends, relatives and neighbors. In other words, collaborating deceitfully to receive vitally needed case. Most refuse and are denied.

Other topics include affects from frequent Israeli attacks. They target ambulances, medical personnel, and facilities providing care.

Using testimonies, images and graphs, updated information explains how Israeli abuse causes needless suffering, especially when vitally needed healthcare's denied.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.