Veolia&Alstom in Palestine

BNC

The campaign has reached an important milestone, but pressure must be increased to ensure that these companies truly end their involvement in the JLR and in all other Israeli projects that violate international law. Veolia has agreed to sell its shares over a five year period.9 Not only will it receive €9m for its shares, but Veolia will continue to operate a system designed to dispossess Palestinians throughout this period and it is easily conceivable that the deal will break down during the sale process. There is yet to be a pubic confirmation that Alstom will sell its CityPass shares. More importantly, selling their respective shares in the project does not absolve Veolia and Alstom of their legal, moral and political responsibility for providing reparations to the Palestinian victims of the JLR or of their ongoing complicity in other Israeli projects that contravene international law. The carriages that Alstom have supplied will continue to transport Israeli settlers to their illegal colonies; the illegal JLR system will continue to operate and expand using the logistical arrangements provided by Veolia. The pressure on Veolia and Alstom must increase and be maintained in order that they be forced to admit responsibility for their actions and be held accountable, accordingly. In the case of Veolia, the campaign must continue against it at least until it ends its other forms of complicity with violations of international law, including the landfill it operates in the occupied Jordan Valley, using captured Palestinian natural and land resources for the needs of Israeli settlements10 and the racist settler-only bus services it runs inside Occupied Palestinian Territory.11

Israeli minister spells out the government's occupation plan

Copyright J.M.M.

Arutz Sheva

(IsraelNN.com) Minister Silvan Shalom (Likud) sent a letter Tuesday to Government Secretary Tzvi Hauser and asked that the government session devote time to an “urgent” discussion of the riots in Jerusalem.

"The Palestinian takeover in Jerusalem must be blocked and we must act swiftly to restore Israeli sovereignty in Jerusalem in general and on the Temple Mount in particular,” Shalom wrote. He claimed that the PA and the Islamic Movement are colluding to undermine Jewish sovereignty.

The 'dovish' singer who justifies the murderous regime

Ynet

But, now, today, I know that deep in your hearts YOU WISH for the demise of this beast called Hamas who has terrorized and murdered you, who has turned Gaza into a trash heap of poverty, disease and misery. Who in the name of "allah” has sacrificed you on the bloody alter of pride and greed.

...

I am privileged to live in a democracy where women are not objects but presidents, where a singer can say and do as she pleases! I know you do not have this privilege (yet…but you will, inshallah, you will…)

...

I can only wish for you that Israel will do the job we all know needs to be done, and finally RID YOU of this cancer, this virus, this monster called fanaticism, today, called Hamas. And that these killers will find what little compassion may still exist in their hearts and STOP using you and your children as human shields for their cowardice and crimes.

Are we to believe this woman can be so ignorant of the political situation a few kilometers away from her 'seaside home'? On the other hand, if she is a willing propagandist for the Israeli régime, could she have so little self-pride as to risk such ridicule? Does she really believe one single Gazan will thank her for her compassion? Or could it be, that she knows the world (or indeed Israel) either couldn't care less or couldn't know less about her sickening disdain for Palestinian lives?
And here's a little jewel in Miss Nini's letter:

I see through your veil of fear my brothers, through your burka!

Did Dubya come out of the shadows to write Miss Nini's "moving letter" to her Palestinian "brothers"?

General outlines of Obama's Peace Plan

IMEMC

1. International presence in the Jordan Valley, Palestinian Plaines area, and other areas in the West Bank.

2. Annexing some parts of East Jerusalem to remain under Israeli control, while Muslim holy site would be under Arab control.

3. All Palestinian factions would be dissolved and transformed into political parties.

4. Large settlement blocs in the West Bank would remain under Israeli control, while negotiations would be conducted within three months of the plan, to discuss the future of smaller settlements.

5. Several areas in the West Bank would be disarmed, and Israeli would maintain aerial control.

6. Intensifying the Palestinian-Israeli security coordination.

7. The Palestinian Authority would not be allowed to have military alliances with regional countries.

8. The United States would guarantee the establishment of a Palestinian State in the summer of 2011.

9. Allowing an agreed upon number of refugees to return, and to be settled in the Plaines area and other areas in the West Bank, particularly in the cities of Ramallah and Nablus. A special fund for supporting the refugees would also be established.

10. Israel starts releasing the Palestinian political detainees immediately after the peace deal is signed. Three years would be allocated for the release of the detainees.

EI : The pitfalls of Palestinian national consciousness

Electronic Intifada

A national liberation movement that started with such slogans as "the only way to liberation is through the barrel of the gun," and "liberation from the Jordan river to the Mediterranean," and "the right of return is sacrosanct," has moved into the post-colonial condition without achieving independence. The specter of the Oslo accords was everywhere at the conference, but no one wanted to refer to it. All those ex-fighters-turned-politicians would not have been granted an Israeli permit to enter Israeli-controlled territory had it not been for the Oslo accords.

(...)

What we saw in Bethlehem is the embodiment of Frantz Fanon's "pitfalls of national consciousness" -- albeit with a Palestinian gown. The irony, of course, is that Fanon was theorizing about the future post-colonial states after independence. He wrote of neo-colonial subjugation of the native elites. Black cars, fashionable suits, bodyguards, are some of the characteristics of the rising nouveaux riches of (occupied) Palestine. Fanon wrote scornfully that "[t]he national middle class which takes over power at the end of the colonial regime is an underdeveloped middle class. It has practically no economic power, and in any case it is in no way commensurate with the bourgeoisie of the mother country which it hopes to replace" (emphasis added).

Changing the world - one shekel at a time

An economic settler who knows 'his' land is conquered land, wishes to get out of the West Bank - with compensation. Did he not know it was conquered land when he moved there in 1992?

A man with a vision?

Jerusalem Post

Mofaz's words did nothing to assuage Karnei Shomron resident Benny Raz who has been leading the charge in his community for voluntary evacuation under the belief that his settlement would eventually be slated for destruction.
"It's bullshit," said Raz, who accused Mofaz of playing for votes. Initial assurances by Mofaz that his settlement would be inside the fence had also be proved false, said Raz.

"I will only believe it when the Americans say it," said Raz. He said he would see a future in his settlement only when it is deemed part of Israel within the context of internationally recognized agreement.

"I'm not stupid, until then my time here is suspect," he said.

Natural Gas off Gaza

Telegraph

There were some Israeli concerns that the gas money might end up in the hands of Hamas, but they were dealt with last year, when a trust fund was set up that ensured international cash goes only to the Palestinian government appointed by Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian national authority and leader of Fatah.

Electronic Intifada

The Palestinian Investment Fund (PIF), a financial holdings company owned primarily by independent Palestinian shareholders, is investing in the project and heads the negotiations in coordination with Mahmoud Abbas' government in the West Bank. BG won a majority stake in the concession to develop the Gaza Marine Field and originally targeted Egypt for the sale of the natural gas. But pressure from then-British Prime Minister Tony Blair led the company to redirect its efforts toward Israel and develop plans for an underwater pipeline that would transport the gas to an Israeli refinery at Ashkelon. That deal could have eventually provided Israel with approximately 10 percent of its annual energy requirement, and would have generated approximately $1 billion for the PIF. The Hamas election victory in 2006 put all that in jeopardy.

Green Prophet

The two big obstacles preventing this from happening are Israel’s problems with the Palestinians and enough objection from environmental groups, including Greenpeace, who say that the Mediterranean is already so polluted that such an undertaking will literally “finish the Med off.”

Government economic policies, especially where huge profit rake offs are involved (and we all know how corrupt many Israeli government officials are) could push any and all environmental considerations aside, however.

This means that the only other obstacle remaining is the lack of any peace agreement with the Hamas-led Palestinians. From an environmental standpoint, perhaps being at loggerheads with Hamas and Co. is not a bad idea, if it will help save what’s left of Israel’s Mediterranean seacoast.

Consumer Alert

Guardian

Tesco, Sainsbury's, Waitrose and Somerfield have all admitted sourcing produce from Israeli-owned farms on Palestinian territory but claimed that labelling the goods 'origin: West Bank' gave enough information for the customer to make an informed choice.
(...)
British policy is clear, with the government's website stating the UN Security Council resolution that 'settlements are illegal under international law and settlement construction is an obstacle to peace'.

Colonialism two-step programme

How to kill two birds with one stone: Drain Aotearoa of it's indigenous people and settle them in another people's land in an act of demographic ethnic cleansing. Will it happen? Nothing's impossible. Ynet

I believe our forefathers were originally Jewish," Shimshon said.

Yeah. And I believe my forefathers were originally alien. Dig that!

Colonialism then, colonialism now

In reality, Bemba was arrested for challenging and threatening French authority. For over 40 years, the French government involved itself in the CAR's political affairs; the French army has helped install dictator after dictator in that country since CAR's independence from France in 1960 (Hari, 2007). CAR has strong ties with its former coloniser, France and for many years it was reported that France had a 1 200-strong garrison based in CAR. It is that same garrison that engineered changes of government over the years or that supported the government of the day to quell dissent, given that the governments of the day kow-towed to France's agenda.

The French government never forgave Bemba for questioning and challenging their authority in the CAR. This is why Bemba is the only war-thug being sent to jail for sending his goons to kill innocent civilians in a foreign country. Bemba did exactly what the French army has been doing to the CAR since that country's independence. Uganda and Rwanda did the same thing in the DRC, when they invaded that country in 1998, triggering a civil war that killed more than 3 million people.

Democracy Now! 26/06/2008
(see also liste de partage on left for video)

GERALD HORNE:
For example, the statement condemning or questioning the Zimbabweans elections emerged from Swaziland, a South African nation that is one of the last absolute monarchies on this small planet. Some might well question why isn’t Swaziland’s human rights situation being interrogated and investigated? A scant year ago in Nigeria, the continent’s giant, you had shambolic elections, had hundreds killed yet that barely registered a blip on the international media. At least not in the North Atlantic. Many talk, perhaps understandably, about the fact the President Mugabe has served as President since 1980, but what about Omar Bongo of Gabon, a close ally of the U.S, an oil-rich country in West Africa, which of course, he has served as president since 1967? 13 years before Mugabe came into power. I mean, I could go on in this vain, but I think the fact that thousands were killed in Zimbabwe in the 1980’s and yet, he received a virtual knighthood from Queen Elizabeth and received an honorary degree from Massachusetts, and yet, today in 2008, he is a subject of international scorn after of course he expropriates some white farmers, really speaks of profound racism in terms of how this issue has been covered in the North Atlantic media.

More than that, if the situation in Zimbabwe is so terrible, and I agree it is, why is it that the Bush administration continues to send undocumented Zimbabwe workers back to Zimbabwe? There’s been talk about a so- called genocide unfolding in Zimbabwe, yet, you see the Gordon Brown administration in London not giving asylum to Zimbabwe workers who are exiled now in London. We talk about the Mugabe regime, but just the other day it was revealed that Anglo American, the major transnational corporation with close South African ties and headquarters in London, is about to make a $400 million investment in Zimbabwe. Barclay’s bank is in Zimbabwe. Rio Tinto-Zinc, the major mineral conglomerate is in Zimbabwe.

It is of course right to criticise Robert Mugabe and to call for an end to his regime. No doubt many people are also happy about the arrest of Jean-Pierre Bemba as well. It is, however, important for the role of the (ex-) colonial powers and the imperialist powers of today to be brought into the public discussion, especially in an age of so-called 'humanitarian' intervention. It is utterly wrong that countries such as France, Britain should be able to pass for (albeit sometimes weak) sympathetic ex-colonisers (or the benevolant world cop) who simply want to defend democracy to Africa. Not only for moral reasons, but especially in light of imperialist intervention in Afghanistan and Irak, possible intervention in Iran (perhaps through the Israeli proxy) and calls for intervention in Africa (as if they didn't already intervene in their 'ex'-colonies!).

Robert Mugabe get's off lightly

Democracy Now!
(See Liste de partage on left for video)

Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe: “Raising a lot of noise for nothing, absolutely nothing. We will proceed with our elections. The verdict is our verdict. Other people can say what they want, but the elections are ours. We are a sovereign state, and that is it."

The Queen of Great Britain has stripped the despot of his knighthood.

Thoughts for Kenya

Watching and hearing about the recent violence in Kenya, I felt at first, and as usual, frustrated and helpless. Oh sure, the 'western' powers have voiced their concern with regards to electoral irregularities and of course the violence which ensued. As we must all have realised by now, if the 'democratic West' says there were irregularities, then the reality must be much worse than the picture painted in our official media. But what exactly is the 'democratic West' intending to do about it? We've seen their reaction to the massacre of the burmese people. We've seen how much russian democracy matters to them. We've seen how the people of Darfur are still waiting for the 'West' to deliver them from their tyrants and bring 'democracy' to their country. So, what exactly should we expect our leaders to do for the Kenyans? However, I feel the need to react to the image of an ethnic war painted by the media. I have no doubt, that the kenyan media are also responsible. That Kenya is an artificial country created by colonialism is clear. That it is a country with various ethnic groups, of which the main two are the Kikuyu and the Luo, is also a reality. That said, politically it is one country, as is the United States of America. In the US, there are many ethnic groups, and these groups are also special interest groups, some more powerful than others: Latinos, Blacks, Jews, Cubans, WASPS...The leadership, however, is, for better or for worse, the american leadership. It goes without saying, that that leadership is dominated by white males and predominantly protestants. However, when George W Bush was elected in dubious circumstances, it wasn't a case of the white anglo-saxon protestant community oppressing other communities. If oppression of certain communities exists, and it certainly does, it is not done so by the dominant community but by the power in place. If whites in the US are generally treated better by the power, that does not mean, that whites are all out to downtread members of other groups. In fact, I would say, that on different levels, it is all the american people (and citizens of the world!) who are oppressed by the power. Through poverty, repressive laws, propaganda lies and more, the leadership keeps the population under control. It seems, to me, admittedly an outsider (just as much to the US as to Kenya), that in Kenya it is also the power in place which is oppressing the people of Kenya. If it is true, and it is, that the kenyan leadership is dominated by Kikuyus, that should not be understood to mean, that Kikuyus all have their boots on the heads or chests of Luos, Masais, Samburus or others (for yes, if we were to believe our media, only the Kikuyus and Luos count in this dispute). The question of independence for ethnic groups in countries such as Kenya or in the case of the Kurds of Irak is of course a complicated one. It is far from being a black&white one. Should countries break up or should unity be maintained? I believe the very least is to give real autonomy to ethnic groups, where they are effectively living apart from other groups and where their culture and way of life is endangered by more dominant groups. However, if the people of a given country, despite their ethnic affiliations, claim to be nationals of the country, then they should treat the leadership as a national leadership, and it's oppressive power to be directed at all citizens. If Kibaki and his accolytes are holding on to power through electoral fraud, they are not doing so on behalf of Kikuyus, just as Bush's interests are not that whites should dominate american life.
These are my thoughts of the moment, and nothing more. As usual open to discussion.

Zionism and the Land of Israel

Map of Eretz Israel in 1695 Amsterdam Haggada

Shaul Goldstein, Mayor of Gush Etzion:

"We belong to this place. We belong to Jerusalem, we belong to Bethlehem, we belong to..euh..Hebron. This is our heritage. This is our history. Without it, we are not a nation. After sixty years of the Holocaust (sic!), the world must recognise our right to have our jewish state and to help us to make it."

BBC Reporter: "All the way from the Mediterranean to the the River Jordan?"

SG: "From the Mediterranean to the the River Jordan. Israel cannot defend its self with the borders which is the '67 borders. Now we're asking Olmert 'what do you want to acheive? Don't tell me what you want to give! Tell me what you're goin to get!' It's zero.
We don't believe that anyone want's peace with us. The Arabs..want to occupy Israel."

And this is basically what he means:

We don't want anyone to want peace with us (that way we can hold on to Eretz Israel).

And this maybe an 'extremist' settler talking, but let us remember, that settlers are not generally the most religious. They are proof of the idea, that religious imagery is in actual fact an expression of nationalistic fervour. In Israel 'proper' there are religious zealots who claim divine right of Eretz Israel for the jews, and there are secular politicians who in effect do the same. Ariel Sharon was not an exception. All PMs have allowed settlements to expand although this has always been in violation of international law.
As we can see in the links above, noteably the Mafdal link, the idea of Eretz Israel in mainstream zionism is a confusion of secular and religious. Ben Gurion was a socialist, and Herzl was an assimilated (non-religious) austrian Jew. Yet, the idea of Eretz Israel is based on the promise made by 'god' to the jewish people.
In fact, certain ultra-orthodox jewish movements take that promise to have meant, that 'god' would lead the jews to their land, at the time of the coming of the messiah, and only then.

And then there are those who believe in this!:



Since this is an issue full of paradox, I am open to any comments/corrections!