Israel Tested Nuclear Missile Aimed at Iran

Trump says an Iranian attack on anything American will be met with ‘obliteration’.

According to a report in the New York Times Thursday Iran has been using the continuing chaos in Iraq to build up a hidden arsenal of short-range ballistic missiles in that country, that may pose a threat to American allies and partners in the region including Israel and Saudi Arabia.

Iran’s foreign minister accuses the United States, Germany, France and the United Kingdom of not condemning ‘the only nuclear arsenal in West Asia.’ Israel earlier said it tested a rocket propulsion system

Amid growing tension with Iran, Defense Ministry says launch over central Israel was completed as planned, providing no further details

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in Portugal Wednesday, to discuss the growing threats from Iran.

The Threat From Iran Is Overblown- New York Times

Iran not a threat to the U.S.- citizensvoice

No increased Iran threat in Syria or Iraq, top British officer says, contradicting US

Iran Is Not the Greatest Threat to World Peace- the Nation


According to a report in the New York Times Thursday Iran has been using the continuing chaos in Iraq to build up a hidden arsenal of short-range ballistic missiles in that country, that may pose a threat to American allies and partners in the region including Israel and Saudi Arabia.

2008- Israel has carried out the successful test launch of a long-range, ballistic missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead, in what was intended as a clear show of strength to Iran.

Israeli Scientists Develop Bacteria Which “Eat” Carbon Dioxide

Trees and vegetation NEED carbon dioxide to survive thereby giving US oxygen. Could you imagine what would happen if this bacteria was let loose on the planet?

Israeli researchers have developed bacteria fed only with carbon dioxide, the Weizmann Institute of Science (WIS) in central Israel reported on Wednesday.

These bacteria, which build the entire biomass of their body from the carbon in the air, may help develop future technologies that reduce greenhouse gas accumulation in the atmosphere and fight global warming, the Xinhua news agency reported.

According to the study, published in the journal Cell, these bacteria were completely weaned off sugar, after a nearly decade-long process.

The Israeli scientists have been able to “reprogram” E.coli bacteria, which consume sugars and release carbon dioxide, so they use carbon dioxide from the environment and produce the sugars they need to build their body.

The researchers mapped the genes that are essential to this process and added some of them to the bacteria genome in their lab.

In addition, they have inserted a gene in the bacteria that allows them to receive energy from a substance called formate. However, this was not enough to make the bacteria change their diet, and “laboratory evolution” processes were needed to gradually wean them off sugar.

At each stage of the process, the cultured bacteria received a diminishing amount of sugar, and at the same time gained an abundance of carbon dioxide and formate.

The bacteria’s offspring were gradually weaned off sugar dependence, until after about six months of adjusting to the new diet regime, some underwent the complete nutritional turnover.

The researchers believe that the “healthy” habits of these bacteria may prove to be mostly healthy for Earth. For example, biotech companies that use yeast or bacterial cell cultures to produce commodity chemicals may be able produce these in cells using carbon dioxide instead of large amounts of corn syrup used today.

weather.com/en-IN/india/science/news/2019-11-28

Bolivia post coup plans to renew ties with terrorist Israel

Evo Morales: – Cuts ties with Israel over its genocide in Gaza – Declares Israel a “terrorist state” – Cancels deal allowing Israelis to visit Bolivia with no visa – Stands with Syria Coup regime, barely 2 weeks after stealing power: – Restores ties with Israel

Brazil’s President Dilma Rousef (L) and Bolivia’s Evo Morales during the Mercosur Summit in Caracas, on July 29, 2014. Both broke ties with Israel after Gaza massacre and both were overthrown by coup and re-established ties with Israel.

The Ambassador of Israel to the United States and Permanent Observer to the OAS, Ron Dermer, said that his country “is very eager to expand our relations with Latin America” and said Israel “has made a decision to increase its number of embassies in the region. After being invited by President Morales to conduct an audit, the results of which he promised to respect, the OAS instead opted to destabilize the country.*

Bolivia’s new interim government, which gained power following what ousted Bolivian President Evo Morales has denounced as a “coup”, has announced plans to renew ties with Israel.

Speaking with international media on Thursday, Bolivian Foreign Minister Karen Longaric said the country plans “to restore relations with Israel”, but did not give a date for the planned measure or elaborate on any other related details.

Morales had cut relations with Tel Aviv in 2009 shortly after Israel carried out a deadly three-week incursion into Gaza, killing 1,282 Palestinians, 333 of whom were children.

“Bolivia had diplomatic relations with Israel. [But] considering these grave attacks against…humanity, Bolivia will stop having diplomatic relations with Israel,” Morales said at the time in a speech addressing diplomats in his government palace.

June 2019 Bolivian Sacha Llorenti nomination was endorsed by all Latin America and Caribbean countries, and elected by “acclamation” by the 193 member-states that make up the international body.

Morales also said that he was seeking to ask the International Criminal Court (ICC) to charge Israeli officials for the killings.

In 2010, Morales also formally recognized Palestine as a sovereign and independent state within the 1967-defined borders.

La Paz’s change in policy towards the Israeli regime comes after Morales was forced to resign on November 10 under pressure from armed forces after the country’s US-backed opposition rejected the country’s October election results.

Morales has said there is evidence that Washington orchestrated his ouster.

Speaking on Thursday, Longaric said the Morales government’s move to cut ties with Israel “did not take into effect the collateral effects, such as economic and trade issues”.

Longaric added that she hoped renewed relations “could lead to positive aspects for both sides and contribute to Bolivian tourism”.

Governments supportive of Israel seldom represent the people.

In a statement later on Thursday, Israeli foreign minister Israel Katz welcomed the measure.

He said his ministry had “actively worked for a long period of time to promote the renewal of the relationship also with the help of the Brazilian president and minister of foreign affairs”.

“The departure of President Morales, who was hostile to Israel, and his replacement by a government friendly to Israel, allows the fruition of the process,” he added.

The power shift in La Paz and the country’s renewed interest in relations with Israel comes as a number of Central and South American countries, notably Brazil, have adopted increasingly pro-Israel positions in line with policies of US President Donald Trump.

Guatemala opened a new embassy in Jerusalem al-Quds in occupied Palestine shortly after the US formally transferred its embassy from Tel Aviv to the city in May 2018, which prompted worldwide condemnation and anger among Palestinians.

In August, Honduras also recognized Jerusalem al-Quds as the the so-called capital of Israel and announced that it sought to open a diplomatic office there.

 

“Israel”: Colonial State-Making

International law has utterly failed to halt or even slow Israel’s brutal colonial project. The institutions of law can be tools in our political movement, but they cannot liberate Palestine on their own.

A new pathological breed is born before our eyes.

“If you do something for long enough, the world will accept it. . . . International law progresses through violations.”

Review of Justice for Some: Law and the Question of Palestine (Stanford University Press, 2019).

Colonial State-Making

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced earlier this week that the Trump administration would no longer recognize Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Pompeo’s comments signal a technical departure from his predecessor’s. In 2016, John Kerry declared Israel’s settlements to be “inconsistent with international law.” Similarly, during Israel’s sniper attacks on the Great March of Return in Gaza last year, five House Democrats implored Israeli soldiers to “exercise utmost restraint in the use of deadly force and to fully comply with international law.”

Excerpt
At the heart of Israel’s legal work lies its persistent claim that the unique circumstances of Israel and Palestine constitute a state of exception, or a sui generis situation (literally “of its own kind”).

By claiming that no existing legal framework fully applies to its relations with Palestinians, Israel has gradually established its own legal models: as a sovereign state with legal powers to declare such an exception, Israel can claim that it’s acting within the bounds of law.

“A sui generis framework maintains the veneer of legality while producing a violence that ‘shed[s] every relation to law,’” Erakat writes. Indeed, it was this very exception that Mike Pompeo invoked in his announcement this week.

Trump’s reversal of Obama’s position on the legality of settlements was “based on the unique facts, history, and circumstances presented by the establishment of civilian settlements in the West Bank,” he said.

This legal window dressing has proven essential for cultivating Israel’s (misleading) image as “the only democracy in the Middle East.”

Israel’s governing state of exception emerges from the British government’s creation of a “special regime” in post-World War I Palestine, when it sought to govern an area where native Arabs constituted 90 percent of the population.

The Balfour Declaration of 1917, which called for a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine, worked to deny Arab Palestinians the status of a recognized political community.

Zionists justified this political erasure on the grounds that Palestine was, in the words of Lord Balfour, “absolutely exceptional.”

By incorporating the declaration verbatim into the Mandate for Palestine in 1922 — making Britain the mandatory power in Palestine — the League of Nations “institutionalized the framework of exception” by “transforming British colonial prerogative into international law and policy,” Erakat writes.

Palestinians’ claims to legal redress were thus rendered nonjusticiable.

This predicament was only further entrenched with the establishment of Israel in 1948.

“The state’s establishment retroactively legitimated Israel’s founding violence because, not only was the violence used in the service of a public interest defined by the nascent settler sovereign, it also embodied a claim of new lawmaking authority,” Erakat argues.

“Therefore, once diplomatic recognition was extended to Israel, its actions in pursuance of its statehood become beyond legal and diplomatic challenge.”

New Legal Frontiers

Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and Gaza in the aftermath of the June 1967 war created an opportunity for the state to make novel claims about international law that served to consolidate its land theft and ethnic cleansing.

The occupation forced Israel’s lawyers to confront a major question of international law: did Israel’s presence in the West Bank and Gaza constitute an “occupation”?

If so, international law would require that Israel work toward a political solution to restore a displaced sovereign’s authority — meaning Israel would have to give up control over these territories.

On the other hand, if the territories were not occupied as a matter of law, international law would require that Israel grant citizenship to the territories’ Palestinian inhabitants, thus nullifying Israel’s goal of a Jewish demographic majority.

Yehuda Zvi Blum, Hebrew University law professor and Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, resolved Israel’s dilemma in a 1968 scholarly article.

Consistent with the 1922 mandate’s political erasure of Palestinians, normalized later by Israel’s creation, Blum “exceptionalized” the West Bank and Gaza Strip by claiming that they had no sovereign power prior to the war, thus rendering void the law’s requirement that an occupying power maintain the sovereignty rights of a nation under occupation.

Rather than completely eschewing occupation law, however, Blum insisted that Israel should abide by its humanitarian provisions for the sake of assuming quasi-legal control over the territories, and creating the appearance of abiding by occupation law.

Under this sui generis legal regime, Erakat writes, Israel “could exercise its authority . . . without either preserving the sovereign rights of its inhabitants or absorbing them under its civil jurisdiction,” thereby suspending Palestinians in a “legal vacuum with only attenuated legal claims to humanitarian relief.”

After decades of effective legal work by Israel, Palestinians’ already nearly nonexistent capacity for pursuing legal recourse was extinguished even further.

Israel’s rule-of-law framework enabled it to enjoy “both the powers of an occupant and a sovereign in the [West Bank and Gaza], while Palestinians enjoy neither the rights of an occupied people nor the rights of citizenship,” as other scholars have written.

“An Armed Conflict Short of War”

The next major inflection point in Israel’s legal work occurred as Israel began to use exceptional military force — most notably public assassinations — during the Palestinian uprising of the early 2000s known as the Second Intifada.

By claiming the right to use a greater amount of force than usually available to an occupying power under conventional interpretations of international law, Israel crushed the intifada with the legitimating force of a liberal rule-of-law framework.

Consistent with this sui generis tradition of applying its own legal framework, Israel strategically avoided classifying its military operations as either of the two types of war recognized under international law: neither an international armed conflict (IAC) nor a non-international armed conflict (NIAC).

Instead, Israel claimed that it was engaged in an “armed conflict short of war.” To classify the conflict as a war against a liberation movement (IAC) would recognize Palestinians’ right to use force in pursuit of their self-determination, enshrined in international law in the 1970s.

Similarly, calling it a civil war (NIAC) would “unravel the false partition separating Israel from the Occupied Territories,” Erakat writes, and “acknowledge Israel’s maintenance of a singular, discriminatory government.”

By claiming that these existing legal frameworks did not sufficiently apply to its self-proclaimed ­sui generis conflict with Palestinians, Israel asserted the sovereign right to create its own framework for regulating war.

As Erakat puts it, “Israel deliberately exceptionalized its in fact non-exceptional confrontations with Palestinians in order to expand its right to use force and delegitimize any responsive force.”

This set the tone for its massive military assaults on Gaza in the decade to come. In short, Erakat asserts, “Israel literally created new law for colonial dominance.”

Violations Become the Norm

Erakat’s goal isn’t to provide a book-length rebuttal to all of Israel’s novel and dubious legal arguments, but rather to show how Israel’s strategic deployment of international law at critical junctures over the past century — importantly, with the backing of the United States — has functioned to consolidate its political and military victories.

Although Israel’s legal claims may lack merit, to denounce Israel’s actions as violations of the law is, by itself, a fruitless endeavor.

In a geopolitical context that strongly favors Israel, international law, for Erakat, is not a particularly helpful resource for winning Palestinian liberation.

For one, it lacks a hierarchal enforcement model. Unlike US domestic law, international law has no supreme court to issue rulings that would be binding on all nation states.

Rather, it is fragmented among various institutions and mechanisms that correspond with specialized areas of law.

Moreover, international law sources much of its substance from custom — how states, especially powerful ones, behave and what they believe is legal. I

n this context, the enforcement of international law “reflects the measure of political will and the prevailing balance of geopolitical power,” Erakat writes.

“In cases where there is no political will to compel a state to comply with the law, violations become the norm rather than the exception.”

The United States’ drastic policy shift on Israel’s assassination program during the Second Intifada neatly illustrates the malleability of international law.

Although several top US officials initially criticized Israel’s assassination program, Al-Qaeda’s attacks on September 11 changed the calculus.

As Washington adopted its own assassination program on a global scale, “US opposition transformed into explicit collaboration with Israel,” tempering international criticism of Israel’s practices and bringing the “once unacceptable within the realm of possibility.” The ramifications of this shift, Erakat argues, were huge.

Had the United States maintained its opposition to targeted killings and to the framework of “armed conflict short of war,” Israel’s actions might have remained somewhere between a controversial proposition and a violation of international law.

However, because of diminishing US protest . . . Israel’s violations steadily escaped the zone of brazen violations and moved into the scope of legitimacy.

As though to prove the point, Daniel Reisner, former head of the Israeli military’s International Law Division, boasted, “If you do something for long enough, the world will accept it. . . . International law progresses through violations.

“We invented the targeted killing thesis and we had to push it. At first there were protrusions that made it hard to insert easily into the legal molds. Eight years later, it is in the center of the bounds of legitimacy.”

Law’s Emancipatory Potential

That international law is not an effective starting point for achieving justice in Palestine is a vital insight for leftists developing a progressive foreign policy.

Justice for Some makes clear that winning Palestinian freedom will require confronting the geopolitical power structure that gives international law its meaning.

Insurgent Democrats like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez are on the right track when they propose using US aid as leverage against Israel’s discriminatory practices.

Because Washington’s diplomatic, political, economic, and military support for its client state in Israel has been a “necessary and sufficient condition” for Israeli colonialism, the United States has the power to uniquely influence Israeli policy.

Although Erakat provides a deeply compelling account of how international law has adeptly serviced Israel’s needs, she does not believe that law has no role to play in the road to liberation. To explain law’s operative value, she offers a metaphor for law as the sail of a boat: “The sail, or the law, guarantees motion but not direction.

Legal work together with political mobilization, by individuals, organizations, and states, is the wind that determines direction.” The wind, in her view, is what can make law work for Palestinians.

To capitalize on law’s emancipatory potential, Erakat argues that “the law must be wielded in the sophisticated service of a political movement.”

While a purely legal strategy may attract proceduralist liberals who fetishize law as the savior of the oppressed, it lacks the chops to challenge the power structure that has “placed Palestinians outside the law.”

Only a radical political project can do that. For Erakat, the revolt of the Third World in the 1960s and ’70s, before it was ultimately crushed by imperial restructuring toward global neoliberalism, set a good example: it began to create a geopolitical context that made claims for legal redress by dispossessed people more justiciable.

Despite ubiquitous pleas from liberal Zionists, making sure that Israel complies fully with international law does not guarantee justice for Palestinians. International law isn’t designed for such a task.

“Raise the sail,” or the law, “when useful, drop it when harmful, and stitch together a new one when possible,” Erakat recommends.

As is the case in liberation struggles elsewhere, winning freedom in Palestine requires a mass political movement in which law functions as a tool rather than a substitute for politics.

Only within such a movement can international law be deployed in service of justice, rather than against it.

‘Drunk on power and boredom’: Israeli ex-soldiers detail abuses

Looking for amusement, his unit handwrote bogus VIP permits for the Palestinians who crossed regularly. They were legally meaningless but added some fun to the long hours in the sun.

Humiliation is the aim. A brave people, coward Occupation.

In a controversial new photographic exhibition in Tel Aviv, Israeli former soldiers detail abuses they saw – and perpetrated

Can Israel conceal War Crimes by Emptying its Archives?

Historian Tamar Novick was jolted by a document she found in the file of Yosef Waschitz, from the Arab Department of the left-wing Mapam Party, in the Yad Yaari archive at Givat Haviva. The document, which seemed to describe events that took place during the 1948 war, began:

“Safsaf [former Palestinian village near Safed] – 52 men were caught, tied them to one another, dug a pit and shot them. 10 were still twitching. Women came, begged for mercy. Found bodies of 6 elderly men. There were 61 bodies. 3 cases of rape, one east of from Safed, girl of 14, 4 men shot and killed. From one they cut off his fingers with a knife to take the ring.”

The writer goes on to describe additional massacres, looting and abuse perpetrated by Israeli forces in Israel’s War of Independence. The Israeli top brass knew about what was going on in real time.

Morris’ footnote (in his seminal “The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem, 1947-1949”) states that this document was also found in the Yad Yaari Archive. But when Novick returned to examine the document, she was surprised to discover that it was no longer there.

middle-east-monitor

Haaretz published an investigation carried out by journalist Hagar Shezaf and which revealed how Israel has been systematically hiding the Israeli archive which documented Zionist crimes against Palestinians.

Damaging historical documents or hiding them from researchers is an illegal act. However, Israel has been working hard for decades to black-out the historical records in these documents in an effort not to stain its image before the eyes of the world.

The great Israeli historian Benny Morris said that the Hasbara Department of the Israeli foreign ministry issued in 1969 a booklet authored by his father which denies the Zionist massacre committed against civilians in the Palestinian village of Deir Yassin.

“In the booklet,” Morris said, “it was claimed that there was no massacre in Deir Yassin and that the story about the massacre is supposedly an Arab fiction.”

Israel plans to hide documents relating to the Nakba (violent expulsion of Palestinians from their homes and lands) in an effort to hide its crimes and perpetuate its lies.

Israel prevents journalists and protesters, often killing them.

“The objective is to undermine the credibility of studies about the history of the [Palestine] refugee problem,” Yehiel Horev, former head of the Israeli defense ministry’s security bureau Malmab, explained. He added that “an allegation made by a researcher that’s backed up by an original document is not the same as an allegation that cannot be proved or refuted.”

“If someone were doing this to Holocaust documents, there would be a cry to the heavens. What a shame.”

The Jewish State is actively trying to erase the Nakba (genocide) and any critical discussion of it. Holocaust denial is illegal in Germany – but Nakba denial is not illegal in Israel, and it is thriving.

Happy then, happy now to celebrate their stolen land.

Israeli journalist Jonathan Ofir wrote in Mondoweiss.

If Israel is attempting to erase the Nakba  from its archive in order to bury Palestinian history, civilization, culture and rights, their attempts will fail.

One reason for this is that Israel has not stopped committing war crimes and genocide against Palestinians since its creation in 1948, when its gangs, which became its army, killed thousands of Palestinians – displacing around 800,000 – and demolished over 530 cities and towns and villages. It has continued committing crimes against the Palestinians until this day.

Israel also continues to disregard international laws and conventions, and ignore resolutions issued by international bodies which have been calling for it to respect Palestinians, their rights and allow Palestine refuges to return to their homes.

Contrary to the words of Israel’s first Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion, Palestinians have not forgotten their right to the land, their homes and their right of return. “The old [Palestinians] will die and the young will forget,” Ben-Gurion infamously said, however generation after generation Palestinians have passed on their history and their link to the land. Even those in the diaspora have held on to their roots.

Not only have the Palestinians not forgotten Palestine but the whole world of decent people are on their side. Not what Ben Gurion expected!

Another reason why Israel’s policies will fail is that global support for the Palestinians is on the rise, and more is being done to highlight their plight. This has meant that eyes are on Israel’s policies against Palestinians are in the spotlight and are being documented, shared and efforts are being made to hold it accountable.

A number of those working to that end are in Israel. They are reluctant to support the state’s policies regarding its archives. This community is emerging and moving to fight the government’s efforts to hide the crimes it has committed.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor or Informed Comment.

Let’s Be Clear: Israel Settlement in Palestine Policy Constitutes a War Crime. STILL.

Israeli colonial settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories are not only illegal under international law, they are war crimes…This constitutes a major threat to international peace.

A toxic mix of white supremacy and Christian Zionism

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s declaration Monday that the United States doesn’t view Jewish settlements as inconsistent with international law – i.e. illegal – has delighted the settlers and their supporters. It gave Benjamin Netanyahu a much-needed shot in the arm at a crucial political juncture. It could help Donald Trump solidify evangelical support in advance of his critical year of an impeachment process and an election campaign. It could very well serve Pompeo himself, who is eyeing a Senate run in Kansas, where evangelicals comprise a third of the population.

Israeli colonial settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories…are not only illegal under international law, they are war crimes…This constitutes a major threat to international peace

 ALL Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) are illegal.

  • Israel’s long-running policy of settling civilians in occupied territory amounts to a war crime.[1]

This needs to be clearly said now, without ambiguity. The United States government, as sponsor of the current ‘peace talks’ between Israel and Palestinians, must uphold rule of law and human rights. Despite the fact that the U.S. has historically taken the same position as the international community that Israeli settlements within the OPT are illegal, they have chosen to prevaricate in recent years, using words like ‘unhelpful’ or ‘illegitimate’ to describe settlement building by Israel.

This does favors for no one. Not the United States, not Palestinians, and not Israel.

[pullquote text=”Israel’s long-running policy of settling civilians in occupied territory is considered a war crime under the statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC).”]This equivocation does, however, help sustain the cycle of violence and perpetuate further violations of international humanitarian and human rights law.

The West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip all remain under effective control of the Israeli government. The legal obligations for any occupying power are outlined in international humanitarian law (IHL), particularly the Fourth Geneva Convention. Palestinians living in the OPT are considered protected persons under the convention, which Israel has ratified.

Israel argues that a Jewish presence has existed on the West Bank for thousands of years and was recognized by the League of Nations in 1922. But these Palestinian Jews are not the irregular Jews of Europe who came to conquer non-Jews.

IHL stipulates states are not to transfer their own civilians into territory they occupy, or to forcibly transfer protected persons from or within an occupied territory. States are also forbidden from destroying individual or collective property in an occupied territory, except when this is rendered absolutely necessary by military operations.

Under Israeli law, settlements ‘authorized’ by the government are legal while smaller, ‘unofficial’ outposts are illegal. Sometimes the Israeli government retroactively ‘legalizes’ previously unauthorized outposts. International law does not make any such distinctions; all Israeli settlements in the OPT violate the Fourth Geneva Convention.

The international community has consistently recognized that settlements contravene international law and create a situation which perpetuates a range of violations of Palestinian human rights including, but not limited to, discriminatory policies based on nationality, ethnicity and religion.

The United Nations Fact Finding Mission (FFM) on Israeli Settlements found “a multitude of the human rights of the Palestinians are violated in various forms and ways due to the existence of the settlements” and “Israel is committing serious breaches of its obligations under the right to self-determination and under humanitarian law.”

The chair of the FFM, Ms. Christine Chanet said, “In compliance with Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention Israel must cease all settlement activities without preconditions.”

In order for the United States government to respect the rule of law during these ‘peace talks’ and truly facilitate a just and sustainable peace in the region, they must insist Israel immediately halt all construction of settlements and related infrastructure as a first step towards removing all settlers from the OPT.

[1] Israel’s long-running policy of settling civilians in occupied territory is considered a war crime under the statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC).  Article 8(2) of the Rome Statute defines “the transfer, directly or indirectly, by the Occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies, or the deportation or transfer of all or parts of the population of the occupied territory within or outside this territory” as a war crime when committed as part of a plan or policy or as part of a large-scale commission of such crimes.

When Israel’s military begins to attack, so does its army of online trolls

excerpt from Mondoweiss

Act.IL is a global pro-Israel campaign at least partially funded by the country’s government.

The project includes an app that enables users to earn points and prizes for promoting the state of Israel online, by attacking BDS and other pro-Palestinian movements.

At the time the developers of the app were talking about how they were working with the Shin Bet [Israel’s internal security service] and, you know, Israeli defense officials to identify targets online and to have a sort of duty to craft responses. But they’ve kind of backtracked on that.

But basically, it’s an app which anyone in the world can download onto their phone and it identifies targets online or they call them “missions” in which pro-Israel individuals can can very easily participate in online discourse. So, it will identify a tweet for them to read, or it will identify a Facebook comment on a news article that they can like.

Essentially, it’s a way of coordinating online behavior in a way that looks organic, but is actually quite choreographed by this sort of centralized body with support from the Israeli government. And yet the intention of it is to very suddenly shape online discourse in a way that’s pro-Israel.

And a lot of them are meant to deflect from the coverage of the fact that it was Israel’s targeted killings of the Islamic Jihad officials which knowingly triggered this latest round of violence. And so a lot of the articles are trying to combat that by saying, you know, there’s rockets all the time, Israel didn’t strike first.

There’s also a bunch of missions where they’re sharing Facebook videos, for example, of rocket fire in Israel to say, you know, this is what life is like under terrorism from Gaza, that kind of thing.

Some of the missions are kind of offensive. One of them is sharing a video of a man in Israel and how his dog is being harmed emotionally by the rocket fire, so promoting the welfare of dogs in Israel. Meanwhile, I think at this point in time about 36 Palestinians have been killed.

Four of them are children. And so [the missions are about] avoiding any questions of Palestinian casualties and trying to put all of the blame on Gaza. And so those are those are the kinds of missions that are that are flooding the app at this moment.

And there were many missions that were targeting specific school board trustees and sending emails to the individuals on the curriculum committee. So, when it comes to those specific instances, I think the app can be quite powerful.

The amount of resources that they put into these kinds of campaigns, what does it suggest? Well, I don’t think it necessarily suggests that [they believe BDS is a real threat], but rather that they are not willing to allow any pro Palestinian sentiment to become accepted within today’s discourse. My impression is that is all less about the actual threat of BDS and more about the absolute intolerance towards any thing positive about the Palestinians.

Evo Morales: ‘Israel is a ‘Terrorist State’

Palestinians see in Bolivia, although geopolitically removed from the Middle East, a true friend, and a trusted ally. On the other hand, the resignation of Morales is welcomed news in Tel Aviv.

Bolivia’s Evo Morales Decries ‘Genocidal’ Israel, Rejects US Embassy Move to Jerusalem

November 13, 2019

On November 10 Bolivian President Evo Morales, announced his resignation from office following what was described by his deputy, Álvaro García Linera, as a military coup.

Morales’ 14 years in office have been seen by many as a triumph for the indigenous people of Bolivia; in fact, for indigenous peoples everywhere.

Along with late Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and late Cuban President Fidel Castro, among other socialist or socialist-leaning South American leaders, Morales represented the hope of an entire generation.

All of this came crashing down following the general election in the country on October 20. Morales’ opponents, who have traditionally received strong backing from Washington, accused the president’s camp of rigging the elections.

Following the announcement of the results which gave Morales a 10% point lead over his rival, an orchestrated campaign was launched by the opposition to overthrow the president.

READ: Bolivia UN envoy says to Israel, ‘You kill children and women’

Well-publicized opposition protests resulted in national upheaval, political turmoil, and an army ultimatum to Morales. Fearing further violence and chaos in the country, the president announced his resignation.

It would be safe to argue that this is not the end of Bolivia’s socialism or the people’s-led drive for justice and equality. Bolivia’s grassroots movement is strong and rooted not just in Bolivia itself, but throughout the region and beyond.

This is one of the reasons why Palestinians of all backgrounds are watching the developments in Bolivia with much anxiety and concern.

Palestinians see in Bolivia, although geopolitically removed from the Middle East, a true friend, and a trusted ally. On the other hand, the resignation of Morales is welcomed news in Tel Aviv.

Highlighted below are seven instances where Bolivia, under Morales, showed the type of solidarity with the Palestinian people that was, at times, unparalleled anywhere else in the world:

  1. Cutting Ties with Israel:

Even before Bolivia officially recognized Palestine, on January 14, 2009, it cut ties with Israel. Later that same day, Venezuela followed suit. The Bolivian decision was made in response to the destructive Israeli war on Gaza, known as Operation Cast Lead. At the time, Morales called for the stripping of the Israeli President Shimon Peres, of his Nobel Peace Prize due to his support of the Israeli crimes in the besieged Gaza Strip.

  1. Recognizing Palestine: 

On December 22, Morales followed his decision of severing ties with Israel with officially recognizing the State of Palestine as an independent and sovereign State. The Bolivian move was clearly part of a coordinated South American effort to show greater solidarity with the Palestinian people, as it came at the heels of a similar decision made by Brazil and Argentina.

  1. Supporting Palestine at the United Nations: 

At his September 21, 2011 UN General Assembly speech in New York, President Morales said, “not only does Bolivia support the Palestinian recognition by the United Nations, our position is to welcome the Palestinians to the United Nations”. Morales also denounced Israel for “bombing, attacking, killing and taking land”, from the indigenous Palestinian people. Bolivia’s support of Palestine at the United Nations remained strong and unfaltering for at least the last decade.

  1. Declaring Israel a terrorist state: 

On July 30, 2014, President Morales went further by declaring Israel a “terrorist state”, following the latter’s most recent war on the Gaza enclave. Morales’ statement was not mere rhetoric as it was coupled with concrete steps to hold Israel accountable for its crimes against occupied and besieged Palestinians. On that day, Bolivia also classified Israel as a “group 3” country, which means that any Israeli wanting to visit Bolivia needed to obtain a visa that required the approval of the National Migration Administration.

  1. Prioritizing Palestine: 

When Bolivia assumed the presidency of the United Nations Security Council in June 2017, it declared Palestine a top priority on its political agenda. “Our priorities: conflict in the Middle East of 50 years of the occupation of Palestine, and non-proliferation of chemical and nuclear weapons,” President Morales tweeted at the time.

  1. Naming Palestinian martyrs: 

On May 15, 2018, the Bolivian ambassador to the United Nations registered one of the most symbolic, yet emotive gestures of solidarity towards Palestine that was ever displayed at international institutions. Sacha Llorenti started his talk at a UN emergency session by naming all 61 Palestinians killed by Israel in Gaza’s Great March of Return. The Palestinian victims were all killed in non-violent popular protests that demanded an end to the Israeli siege on Gaza.

  1. Cooperating with Palestine: 

On June 22, 2019, Bolivia sealed its solidarity with the Palestinian people with the signing of the development cooperation agreement between the two countries. Although free trade and cooperation between both economies is not an easy task, if at all possible, considering that Palestine is under total Israeli control, the agreement was a natural and organic evolution of the political support and the grassroots solidarity with Palestine that has been in the making for many years.

It would be untenable to discount the power of the indigenous movement of Bolivia despite Morales’ abrupt resignation. It would be equally wrong to conclude that the absence of Morales would automatically sever the strong rapport predicated on people’s solidarity and common struggle between Palestine and Bolivia.

“Israel’s” new trick to steal more Palestinian tourism and heritage

“The Israeli cable car project is an obscene violation of the cultural, historical, spiritual, geographic & demographic character of Jerusalem,” Ashrawi said via Twitter.

Palestinians in Silwan, an East Jerusalem neighborhood at the foot of the Old City, said it would encourage tourists to bypass them on the way to holy sites. “(It) will give the impression that it is a Jewish city and remove the Palestinian heritage from it,” Silwan resident Khaled Al-Zeer said, adding that “the foundations of the project will be built on our land”.

JERUSALEM (Reuters) – An Israeli plan to run a cable car over Jerusalem to the walls of the Old City has angered Palestinians who say it would erase their heritage.

The proposed cable car would shuttle some 3,000 tourists and worshipers per hour from Jerusalem’s western part to the Palestinian eastern Old City in a four-minute ride. The plan moved forward this week when a special committee headed by Israel’s finance minister gave it a green light.

A crucial component to challenging Israel’s oppression of the Palestinian people is examining the harmful role of tourism in Israel. Palestinians, wherever they are, are denied the freedom to move freely to and within their homeland by Israel.

At the same time, Israel cultivates a tourism industry that quite literally erases Palestinians from the landscape and history, appropriates Palestinian culture and cuisine, and whitewashes the reality of Israel’s state violence.

A World Bank report has warned that the crisis-plagued Palestinian economy is being stripped of billions of dollars each year by Israeli plundering in Palestinian territory of key natural resources.

Bethlehem Celebrates Another Occupied Christmas

Bethlehem, the birthplace of Jesus, is surrounded by the eight-metre high concrete Separation Wall. This is just one of a number of restrictions on movement imposed by the occupation authorities against Palestinians in the West Bank and tourists wishing to visit the area.

Israel suspended ties with the UN agency for adopting a resolution said to deny Jewish control to the region’s holy sites:

UNESCO  criticized actions taken by Israel, which it refers to as the “occupying Power,” around the holy sites, including restriction of UNESCO experts’ access to sites and actions by Israeli forces against Muslim worshipers. Israel has occupied the West Bank since the war of 1967 and annexed East Jerusalem. This move, however, has not been recognized under international law.

Israel’s planned Jerusalem cable car

“It is inconceivable that what hasn’t been excavated in 2000 years should be dug into now to implement a project in a moment of distraction that will serve as a badge of shame,” Ben-Dov wrote.

Architect’s plans for a Jerusalem cable car showing pylons running parallel to the Old City Walls. (Part of plans submitted to the National Planning Council).

Slamming what he called the planners’ total disregard for the property rights of those likely to be harmed by the cable car, the archaeologist, who was also responsible for excavating the Western Wall tunnels, claimed that construction of the stations would be in “crude violation” of the Antiquities Law, which mandated preservation of excavated sites.

 

Israel uses fake people, stories to promote Jewish immigration, over and over

Nothing is real about the Israel narrative from beginning to end. Once one identifies the Zionist behavior to the Nazi behavior,  which is all to obvious, it all becomes clear. Hitler was right:
“While the Zionists try to make the rest of the World believe that the national consciousness of the Jew finds its satisfaction in the creation of a Palestinian state, the Jews again slyly dupe the dumb Goyim. It doesn’t even enter their heads to build up a Jewish state in Palestine for the purpose of living there; all they want is a central organization for their international world swindler, endowed with its own sovereign rights and removed from the intervention of other states: a haven for convicted scoundrels and a university for budding crooks.

November 1, 2019 

Israel has made a lot of effort to persuade Jews from Europe and the US to migrate in order to maintain the demographic superiority of Jewish citizens in the state which was the purpose of the holocaust and why only Zionists can hold the narrative. Their criminal state depends on it.

Fabricated immigrant stories and quotes along with stock images of people were posted on Twitter by the Israeli Immigrant Integration Ministry to encourage Jews relocate to the occupation state.

An investigation undertaken by the Times of Israel failed to find any of the supposed immigrants quoted on its social media accounts.

Following an inquiry, many of the fake posts – using the now defunct hashtag AliyahStory -encouraging Jews to make “aliyah” – the move to Israel – were deleted and the ministry confirmed yesterday that all of the people quoted were made up.

Israeli news outlet Arutz Sheva noted that in one case, it confirmed that the image was a real person, who was not an immigrant and never made the quote attributed to him.

According to the ministry’s Twitter feed, a Tanya Lipworth from Chicago could never imagine that she would fulfill the Zionist dream and make “Aliyah a reality”.

However, there is no record on the internet of a Tanya Lipworth existing.

“I grew up in a Jewish home, Jewish school, but could never imagine that I would fulfill the #Zionist dream. I realised after spending a year in #Israel after studying that making Aliyah could become a reality,” says Tanya Lipworth from Chicago, USA.

— Misrad Haklita (@MisradHaklita) January 6, 2019

“The thing about life in #Israel after making #Aliyah is that I realized is how to keep in contact with family and friends back home,” Carla Weinberg from Toronto is reported to have said.

Another alleged immigrant, Misrad Haklita was quoted saying: “Modern technology has made it easier to keep in touch! We love our Friday FaceTime!”

According to The Times of Israel, most of the names do appear on Facebook but do not appear to belong to anyone living in Israel.

Oops, Hollywood Jewish director steps in the scene while camera is rolling.

Jason Pearlman, a former spokesman for Israeli President Reuven Rivlin, said: “If it is the case that this is a genuine ministry account, and the photos and names are fabricated, it is nothing short of horrendous.”

“To use stock images to illustrate classrooms or meetings is one thing, but at a time when Israel’s credibility is constantly attacked on social media, to make people up is nothing short of idiotic.”

Israel has made a lot of effort to persuade Jews from Europe and the US to migrate in order to maintain the demographic superiority of Jewish citizens in the state.

Although 20 per cent of the Israeli population are Palestinians, Israel has consistently denied those who were ethnically-cleansed from Palestine since 1948, along with their descendants, their legal right of return to their homeland.

According to internal Jewish Agency figures, immigration to Israel rose by more than a quarter in the first half of 2019, fueled almost entirely by a continued surge in Jewish immigrants from Russia.

No one chose Al Baghdadi as caliph over Muslims except US and Israel

Baghdadi here an Iraqi jihadist who rose from obscurity to declare himself “caliph” of all Muslims as the leader of Islamic State, died by detonating a suicide vest after fleeing into a dead-end tunnel as elite U.S. special forces closed in at the weekend, according to the U.S. government.

Al Baghdadi appeared out of nowhere, (just like ISIS appeared out of nowhere) no one knew him and Islamic scholars pointed out that he didn’t know Islam. Muslims in general denounced him.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The United States has buried the remains of Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi at sea in accordance with Islamic law, a US official told Reuters after he was killed in a raid by US special forces in the village of Barisha in Syria’s Idlib province on Saturday.

The truth: The sacred texts of Islam prefer burial on land, “so deep that its smell does not come out and the beasts of prey do not dig it out”. However, if a person dies at sea and it is not possible to bring the body back to land before decay, or if burial at land becomes impossible, burial at sea is allowed.

Baghdadi here an Iraqi jihadist who rose from obscurity to declare himself “caliph” of all Muslims as the leader of Islamic State, died by detonating a suicide vest after fleeing into a dead-end tunnel as elite U.S. special forces closed in at the weekend, according to the U.S. government. One does not “declare himself the Caliph!” And there’s nothing Islamic about being buried at sea, it’s only allowed if the only choice available!