New York Activists to Singer Leonard Cohen: "Don't Play Apartheid; Don’t Play Israel!"

Adalah-NY: The Coalition for Justice in the Middle East


New York Activists to Singer Leonard Cohen: "Don't Play Apartheid; Don’t Play Israel!"

New York, NY, May 17 - New York activists gathered in front of Radio City Music Hall Sunday night during a Leonard Cohen concert to call upon the singer/songwriter to cancel his scheduled September concert in Israel. The protesters sang songs, chanted, handed out leaflets to concert attendees and produced sidewalk art. The call comes in support of earlier calls by Jews, Palestinians, Israeli citizens and residents of the UK, and coincides with the publication of an open letter by the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI) calling for protests throughout the cities Cohen is touring.

“With the construction of the Apartheid Wall and Israeli settlements on Palestinian lands, and on the heels of the brutal Israeli attack on Gaza that killed over 1,400 Palestinians and injured 5,000 more, the Palestinian Catastrophe continues and we demand that artists start taking a courageous and principled stand by refusing to entertain occupiers and oppressors,” said Riham Barghouti, Palestinian-American activist with Adalah-NY. This week Palestinians around the world commemorate the 61st Anniversary of the Nakba of 1948, when Israeli forces expelled 800,000 Palestinians and destroyed 531 villages.

Protestors chanted “Leonard, Leonard Have A Heart, Don’t Help Apartheid With Your Art” and sang “Ain’t Gonna Let Occupation Turn Me Round, Gonna Keep On Walkin’, Keep Boycottin’” to the tune of “Ain’t Gonna Let Nobody Turn Me Round”. A particular crowd favorite was, to the tune of Frere Jacques,

Are you sleeping, Are you sleeping,

Leonard Cohen, Leonard Cohen

While your songs are so fine

Israel’s taking Palestine

Don’t go there, Don’t go there

Activists passed out fliers to ticket-holders on the back of which was written "Don't Play Israel". Concert-goers were asked to hold them up during the concert so that Cohen could see a visual call to join the growing cultural and academic boycott of Israel by canceling his upcoming concert in Tel Aviv on September 24, 2009. Since over 170 Palestinian civil society organizations issued their call for boycott in July 2005, Palestinian groups have focused on cultural events as a key tool in the Israel government’s campaign to legitimize its ongoing occupation and oppression of Palestinian people.

Before the show, protestors chalked “Leonard: Don’t Play Israel” on the sidewalk in front of the stage entrance. Radio City Music Hall staff quickly mopped the sidewalk. “They can wash away these words, but they can’t wash away the growing boycott movement,” said Hannah Mermelstein, an activist with NYCBI, the New York Campaign to Boycott Israel. NYCBI recently launched its own campaign against Motorola for its development and production of bomb fuses and communications equipment for the Israeli military. “We are proud to be a part of the growing boycott and divestment movement called for by Palestinians. Concerted effort to isolate Israel is the only means to end the ongoing dispossession and oppression of Palestinians by Israel.”

Photos of the demo:

Canada's Canoe.ca blogs on it.

Benny Morris in disgrace again

Monthly Review has a good review of Benny Morris's latest offering. The reviewer, Ran Greenstein, tears Morris's One State, Two States to bits but the bit that struck me was this:

In his rush to demolish arguments he does not like, Morris is not satisfied with reporting the debate on Judt's seminal 2003 piece, advocating a bi-national solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He quotes approvingly what he regards as a definitive argument against the supposed singling out of Israel by Judt. Michael Walzer asks Judt: why start the fight against nationalism with Israel, the Jewish state, why not with France, Germany, Sweden, and so on? That this argument is bogus should be clear even to those not privileged enough to deal with "advanced studies" in Princeton.

In France, the likes of Zinedine Zidane (of Muslim Algerian background) or of Thierry Henry (of Caribbean ancestry) are entitled to full equality and share in national wealth and power no less than the descendants of the ancient Gauls, even if they have no ethnic linkage to them at all, or to the Catholic Church. In Sweden, the likes of Zlatan Ibrahimovic (of Bosnian Muslim origin) are entitled to full enjoyment of citizenship rights as the descendants of the Nordic tribes of ancient times. This is not the case in Israel, in which citizenship and access to resources are determined to a large extent by ethnic origin and religious affiliation, and in which civic nationalism that encompasses all citizens regardless of ethnicity and faith does not exist. Even countries that may give preference in the acquisition of citizenship to ethnic kin of the majority group (Germany, Hungary) do not do that at the expense of indigenous non-German or non-Magyar groups, as is the case in Israel.

To fail to see this basic distinction is not just philosophically shaky but also plainly dishonest.

And yet zionists do this all the time and in the mainstream media they get away with it. But let's hear some more from the reviewer:

Half-truths and distortions are common in the book. To illustrate, let me give three examples:

1. On pp. 124-26, Morris dismisses the notion that the PLO declaration of independence in 1988 constituted the acceptance of a two-state solution or implied recognition of Israel: it did not mention Israel, did not identify the boundaries of the state of Palestine, and retained a focus on Palestinian rights only. Sounds outrageous indeed, until we realize that another document, written 40 years before that, was guilty of the same sins: it did not mention Palestine or a Palestinian state (or right to it), did not identify any boundaries, and remained focused solely on specific historical rights (of Jews). That document is known as the Declaration of Independence of the State of Israel. Can it be the case that Morris is unfamiliar with that text?

2. On p. 129, Morris repeats the canard that he himself helped disseminate, in the New York Review of Books, that Yasser Arafat called for the destruction of Israel in a speech in a Johannesburg mosque in 1994, as he called for a continuation of a 'Jihad.' What Morris 'forgets' to tell his readers is that Arafat repeatedly mentioned in the same speech a process of negotiations with Israel (and prime minister Rabin in particular) as a way to liberate Jerusalem, that he did not mention at all or call for any armed activities, and that he explicitly asserted that Jerusalem belonged with the 1967 occupied territories and excluded from this definition pre-1967 Israel.

3. At various points Morris asserts that Arafat rejected the two-state solution at the Camp David summit of 2000, while all participants have made it clear that what Arafat rejected was the specific proposals presented by Prime Minister Barak, which sought to incorporate about 10% of the occupied West Bank into Israel and fragment the rest into various non-contiguous blocks. At no point did Arafat reject the goal of the two-state solution, but rather the Israeli version (which was improved upon later in the Taba negotiations, though still fell short of Palestinian demands). He sought to extract better terms from the US and Israel and has managed to do that up to a point, as Morris, if forced to, would acknowledge (in other words, Arafat behaved completely rationally as a negotiator, even if he ended overplaying his hand). In fact, in a rare moment of honesty (p. 174), Morris admits that his entire construction of Arafat as a deceitful politician, who used his public support for the two-state solution to sneak in the one- state solution in a phased manner, falls apart when we examine his refusal to accept the Barak-Clinton offer (why didn't Arafat accept it and then proceeded with his 'real' goal -- the destruction of Israel? Morris cannot really answer).

I'd like to think that this book is out of date now, that with the departure of George W.Bush and the rise and rise of more overtly right wing forces in Israel that most westerners find repugnant, there is too much disdain for this particular brand of hasbara but if the reviewer is to be believed, Yale knows what it's doing, commercially anyway.

Firefighting Israel's ethnic cleansing

Here's the Morning Star on the UK's main firefighters' union supporting BDS:

AS the Fire Brigades Union conference ended on Friday, delegates gave overwhelming support for a boycott of Israeli goods and backed calls for sanctions in solidarity with the Palestinian people.

Moving the Palestine composite motion, Devon and Somerset delegate Dave Chappell began by praising the history of solidarity shown by firefighters to Palestinians and the people of South Africa during apartheid "before it was sexy to do so.

"What the Palestinians are being subjected to is nothing short of ethnic cleansing by the state of Israel."

Thanks to the person who sent me the link I now know that the Morning Star has a website with more then just a homepage.

And here are the articles linked on the page of the above article:

Britain headlines

• Marchers demand action to save jobs
• G20 activists launch legal fight against police
• Council workers' pay offer 'worth pennies'
• Protesters take to the streets to end ongoing Gaza crisis
• 'Shocking' rise in prison violence

World headlines

• India's Congress Party claims win
• Tamil Tigers declare immediate ceasefire
• South Korean police 'undermining democracy'
• Cuba celebrates gay rights
• Iraq's oil 'squandered'

Editorial

Little Star

HERE we go again. For the second time in a year, we've been forced to evacuate the Star's offices and set up our journalists anywhere we can find the space.

Archive

Features

Blacklist shame

Alan Ritchie

The union which is consistently fought bosses' dirty tactics in the building industry.

Silent slaughter

John Pilger

Waking up to the tragedy of the Tamil people trapped in the Sri Lanka war zone

Archive

WTF is Palestine?

W is a for "where".

Many thanks to Joe90 for drawing Just Peace UK's attention to this post on Lenin's Tomb:



Oh, I just clicked a link on the Tomb post and it took me to the different perspective blog where the blogger is encouraging people to write to the Advertising Standards Authority who, on past performance over a similar issue with the State of Israel, won't take any action.

I say that because a few years ago, I can't remember the medium used, but Israel started an advertising campaign for tourists using the Dome of the Rock to promote Jerusalem. The Advertising Standards Authority, which "works to keep advertising legal, decent, honest and truthful", got many complaints and took no action. I can't remember their excuse for allowing Israel to use occupied territory to advertise "Israel" but they certainly thought they had one, hence no action.

Still, it might be worth a try.

By the way, the different perspective blog got the story and the campaign call from the Palestine Solidarity Campaign.

UPDATE: Dan Judelson has a cautionary email on the Just Peace UK list. Apparently, in possible anticipation of complaints, if you actually see the poster, rather than a photo of it, you can see thin white lines demarcating (maybe) the occupied territories except for the Golan Heights. If you write, they may try to get Israel off the hook by mentioning the white lines but they don't have that excuse for the Golan Heights.

Lieberman: don't worry, Miliband's a liar

Here's a bit of a BDS update for you. According to the Jewish Chronicle, high-ups from Tescos are going to meet with activists from the Palestine Solidarity Campaign though only to fob them off with something. See this:

Tesco executives have agreed to meet members of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign to discuss labelling on produce from West Bank settlements, despite insisting that there will be no change in their policy.

The long-challenged voluntary labelling guidelines, whereby supermarkets are encouraged by the government to state explicitly on packaging whether the produce comes from Jewish settlements or not, may be in place by the end of the month.

But see further down the piece:

Although Israeli officials have protested about the guidelines, one source close to the foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, was much more sanguine this week. He said: “I understand David Miliband wants to be leader of Labour and so has to say some things to curry favour in his party. What he has said to us is much less worrying, and I am very optimistic.”

So because Miliband wants to be elected leader of the Labour Party he is lying publicly whilst putting the mind of Moldova's man in Palestine at ease. It means that the racist war criminals of the State of Israel are more in the know about British policy than the British are. Wonderful! And it's not even the JC's headline because BRITS BOW TO ISRAEL isn't considered headline grabbing stuff.

The real John Strawson?

I had to put a question mark there because I'm not sure what the real John Strawson amounts to. It seems like only yesterday but was actually 11th January 2009 when the assault on Gaza by Israel was in full swing that John Strawson co-signed a letter to the Times (UK) denouncing Israel's actions in Gaza as, among other things, aggression and therefore a war crime. I think that's what it was saying:

ISRAEL has sought to justify its military attacks on Gaza by stating that it amounts to an act of “self-defence” as recognised by Article 51, United Nations Charter. We categorically reject this contention.

The rocket attacks on Israel by Hamas deplorable as they are, do not, in terms of scale and effect amount to an armed attack entitling Israel to rely on self-defence. Under international law self-defence is an act of last resort and is subject to the customary rules of proportionality and necessity.

The killing of almost 800 Palestinians, mostly civilians, and more than 3,000 injuries, accompanied by the destruction of schools, mosques, houses, UN compounds and government buildings, which Israel has a responsibility to protect under the Fourth Geneva Convention, is not commensurate to the deaths caused by Hamas rocket fire.

For 18 months Israel had imposed an unlawful blockade on the coastal strip that brought Gazan society to the brink of collapse. In the three years after Israel’s redeployment from Gaza, 11 Israelis were killed by rocket fire. And yet in 2005-8, according to the UN, the Israeli army killed about 1,250 Palestinians in Gaza, including 222 children. Throughout this time the Gaza Strip remained occupied territory under international law because Israel maintained effective control over it.

Israel’s actions amount to aggression, not self-defence, not least because its assault on Gaza was unnecessary. Israel could have agreed to renew the truce with Hamas. Instead it killed 225 Palestinians on the first day of its attack. As things stand, its invasion and bombardment of Gaza amounts to collective punishment of Gaza’s 1.5m inhabitants contrary to international humanitarian and human rights law. In addition, the blockade of humanitarian relief, the destruction of civilian infrastructure, and preventing access to basic necessities such as food and fuel, are prima facie war crimes.

We condemn the firing of rockets by Hamas into Israel and suicide bombings which are also contrary to international humanitarian law and are war crimes. Israel has a right to take reasonable and proportionate means to protect its civilian population from such attacks. However, the manner and scale of its operations in Gaza amount to an act of aggression and is contrary to international law, notwithstanding the rocket attacks by Hamas.

The letter was signed by many people, especially lawyers with reputations for handling human rights type cases. Here's how John Strawson's name appears:

John Strawson, University of East London

Now Strawson is a member of Engage's editorial board, whatever that means. I can't find an editorial board page on the Engage site at the mo' but check out this comment from a perplexed soul called Keith P at Engage who clearly follows these things:

“collective punishment of Gaza’s 1.5m inhabitants contrary to international humanitarian and human rights law. In addition, the blockade of humanitarian relief, the destruction of civilian infrastructure, and preventing access to basic necessities such as food and fuel, are prima facie war crimes.”

This analysis seems inconsistent in tone, content, and logic to all that presented here and advanced by David [Hirsh] in the name of Engage. Are we to assume that Engage’s editorial board is fundamentally divided as to whether what we are witnessing and have been witnessing in Gaza is a war crime or a justifiable act of defence against an existential threat to the lives of Jews?

The petition in question is here:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/letters/article5488380.ece

Looking forward to any clarification on this.
Thanks.

If ever there was a fool's errand it's asking Engage for clarification especially about John Strawson. See Hirsh's rapid response:

Keith,

Engage has no collective position on “whether what we are witnessing and have been witnessing in Gaza is a war crime or a justifiable act of defence against an existential threat to the lives of Jews?”

Engage is a campaign against antisemitism, not an Israel/Palestine campaign or discussion group.

I tried to sum up what I feel are some of the central ideas of Engage, but it is only my attempt. Here http://engageonline.wordpress.com/about-engage/

John Strawson is one of the most incisive and committed campaigners against antisemitism that I know. I’m proud that he thinks of himself as being part of Engage.

. And a minute later John Strawson, who was lucky to be reading the site at the exact moment that Hirsh was posting a response, posted an ever so slightly defensive response of his own:

Kieth P should read the letter more carefully. It is making a certain legal point – which I have made in comments here. The letter in addition to making it clear that Hamas’s rockets and suicide attacks are war crimes ends by saying

“We condemn the firing of rockets by Hamas into Israel and suicide bombings which are also contrary to international humanitarian law and are war crimes. Israel has a right to take reasonable and proportionate means to protect its civilian population from such attacks. However, the manner and scale of its operations in Gaza amount to an act of aggression and is contrary to international law, notwithstanding the rocket attacks by Hamas.“

I can't see anything in Strawson's response that actually contradicts Keith P's point that John Strawson lent his name to allegations of Israel committing war crimes and that this contradicts the apparent Engage position that it is antisemitic to accuse Israel of war crimes over "cast lead" and possibly over anything as you'll see if you look at the rest of that thread.

Well now, Strawson has a post on Engage denouncing the Universities and Colleges Union for being "obsessive" about Israel with regard to a recent resolution. In the post he says the following:

The resolution itself is factually inaccurate and erroneous on international law. First Israel did not set out to remove an elected government. It is a myth that the Hamas was the elected government of Gaza. After the Hamas-led front won the Palestinian Authority elections in 2006, the organization attempted a coup against the elected President (Abbas) of the authority in 2007, and was constitutionally removed from office. It then retreated to Gaza – not as the elected representatives of the people but as failed coup-plotters.

Nor is it legally tenable than Israel’s war (which I absolutely opposed) was “aggression”. Even the rather pathetic Arab League’s report “No Safe Place” concludes “due to the uncertain meaning of ‘aggression’ it could make no finding on the question of whether Israel’s offensive constituted aggression” (16:2). The UCU boycotters are clearly legal experts in a very special sense.

Now let's look at that letter to the Times again:

Israel’s actions amount to aggression, not self-defence, not least because its assault on Gaza was unnecessary. Israel could have agreed to renew the truce with Hamas. Instead it killed 225 Palestinians on the first day of its attack. As things stand, its invasion and bombardment of Gaza amounts to collective punishment of Gaza’s 1.5m inhabitants contrary to international humanitarian and human rights law. In addition, the blockade of humanitarian relief, the destruction of civilian infrastructure, and preventing access to basic necessities such as food and fuel, are prima facie war crimes.

And the post again:

Nor is it legally tenable than Israel’s war (which I absolutely opposed) was “aggression”

And the Times letter again, remember John Strawson is a stickler for reading things properly:

Israel’s actions amount to aggression, not self-defence, not least because its assault on Gaza was unnecessary

So what is John Strawson all about exactly? I find it quite disturbing that he can so angrily accuse a questioner of carelessness when he clearly contradicts himself so readily without any acknowledgement that he could actually have changed his mind or he felt, when presented with evidence of what Israel was actually doing by the various other co-signatories to the Times letter, he couldn't actually deny that Israel was engaged in aggression and that the aggression did constitute a war crime of itself without getting into the atrocities within that conflict: the crimes within the crime.

There's more disturbing stuff in the same post and actually what looks like a breach of the European Union Monitoring Committee's stupid working definition of antisemitism. Look at this:

The truth is that the obsessive and irrational character of the boycotters means that for them the actual adoption of any resolution is neither here nor there. What they want is the opportunity to continue to circulate crude anti-Zionist propaganda at every opportunity. Attacking Israel and normalizing historical and political falsities is their aim. It is not the boycott but the continual fueling of hate against Israel, Israelis and Jews whose national identity is shaped by Israel that is the purpose. In this sense the twisted logical of debating a motion that cannot be legally adopted becomes a clear political campaign.

Say what?

Israel, Israelis and Jews whose national identity is shaped by Israel that is the purpose

Which Jews would they be then, these "Jews whose national identity is shaped by Israel"? What does it mean even? Does it mean that the Jewish identity itself depends on Israel? Does it mean that criticism of Israel is intrinsically a criticism of Jews generally or just those "Jews whose national identity is shaped by Israel"? And if "Jews whose national identity is shaped by Israel" differ from Jews generally, what is the difference?

He's a strange one, this John Strawson. He goes public via the Times newspaper, the jewel in the crown of the Murdoch media, denouncing Israel's war crimes. He accuses someone who notices this for not reading properly. He then insists that Israel committed no war crimes or at least no aggression having already said it did indeed commit an act of aggression. He rounds off by apparently asserting that the Jewish identity is a national identity shaped by a colonial settler state that most Jews do not come from and have no demonstrable connection to. And no doubt, given Engage's support for the EUMC's stupid working definition of antisemitism, he takes the view that it is antisemitic to blame all Jews for Israel which is a tiny bit of the definition that I agree with.

Well I suppose we couldn't agree on even a small thing for long but who or what is the real John Strawson?

UPDATE: John Strawson is now claiming that the final paragraph of the letter to the Times that he put his name to was nothing to do with him because it was tacked on after he signed it. Let's see what he says in the comments under his own Engage post:

Brian will find several academics who will argue that Israel committed aggression in the Gaza war. Indeed a letter to the Sunday Times (January 11 2009) signed by myself – and many other international lawyers – had this position in its last paragraph. The section was added to the letter after I had signed a different draft and published without my permission.

Neither "Brian" nor anyone else, at the time of writing, has challenged Strawson over his ill-tempered response to "Keith P" back in January when he told Keith P to read that same paragraph more carefully. Back in January that final paragraph epitomised Strawson's position. Now it's nothing to do with him and he didn't consent to his name appearing as a co-signatory. Would it not have made more sense for Strawson, rather than insulting Keith P, to simply disown the letter when it was all fresh in his mind?

But then he would have been all too clear that it's not just the final paragraph that mentions Israel's "aggression". Look back at the letter, it appears in the paragraph above and seems to be the main point of the letter.

Another question here is has Strawson taken up the issue of his name being taken in vein with whoever organised the letter? I think we should be told.

Lieberman commemorates Nakba Day

One of the more overt racists in the Israeli government commemorated the Nakba by proposing that any Palestinians commemorating it should go to prison for 3 years. Here's Ha'aretz:

Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman's party wants to ban Israeli Arabs from marking the anniversary of what they term "the Catastrophe" or Nakba, when in 1948 some 700,000 Arabs lost their homes in the war that led to the establishment of the state of Israel.

The ultranationalist Yisrael Beitenu party said it would propose legislation next week for a ban on the practice and a jail term of up to three years for violators.

"The draft law is intended to strengthen unity in the state of Israel and to ban marking Independence Day as a day of mourning," said party spokesman Tal Nahum.

The initiative could fuel racial tensions stoked by Lieberman's February election campaign call to make voting or the holding of public office in Israel contingent on pledging loyalty to the Jewish state.

State of Israel funding for the Edinburgh Film Festival 2009

Here's an action alert from the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign:

DEAR SUPPORTER OF PALESTINIAN RIGHTS

The Edinburgh International Film Festival (EIFF) has again accepted funding from the Israeli Embassy, while people in Gaza are still living in the rubble of their homes, and Gaza victims of Israel’s white phosphorous attacks are still in critical care.

In 2006, a public outcry forced the EIFF to return Israel’s tainted money. On that occasion the EIFF stated publicly that its action was due to popular outrage at the massacres Israel had recently committed in Lebanon:

"This funding was secured some three months ago, well before the commencement of current hostilities in Lebanon. Of course we acknowledge that the situation has altered dramatically since then, and with this in mind, took the decision early yesterday to decline any funding from the Israelis."

The Director’s decision to again associate the Israeli Government with the EIFF comes after the massacres of over 1400 people in Gaza, during which:
• The United Nations said the IDF intentionally burned its food stores in Gaza
• Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International accused the army of illegally using phosphorous bombs in densely populated areas
• The International Red Cross described the injured being denied medical attention and strikes on medical crews
• Israeli journalist Amira Hass wrote of the killing of people flying white flags and the annihilation of entire families
• British MP Gerald Kaufmann described Israel’s mass killing as ‘Nazi’
• The UN General Assembly President called for a world-wide boycott of ‘apartheid Israel’

Only a few days ago, on May 1st, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in Palestine condemned ‘the recent wave of eviction orders and demolitions of Palestinian houses’. Israel’s ongoing crimes include the murder of unarmed protesters, the burning of olive groves and other farmland, the continued imposition of a brutal siege of Gaza, and the extension of its apartheid Wall, declared illegal by the International Court. It is unbearable that EIFF should accept sponsorship from such a Government.

Faced with such awful crimes, Israeli poet Aharon Shabtai had no choice:
“I do not believe that a State that maintains an occupation, committing on a daily basis crimes against civilians, deserves to be invited to any kind of cultural week. That is, it is anti-cultural; it is a barbarian act masked as culture in the most cynical way. It manifests support for Israel.”

We hope the EIFF will follow the example the Bloomsbury Theatre which recently cancelled a performance involving Israeli military personnel. Failing this, we will:
• organise pickets at EIFF events
• publicise the Festival’s links with the Israeli Embassy locally and internationally
• call for a boycott of the 2009 events to protest Israel’s massacres of the Palestinian people

Please protest to the EIFF personally, stating that
• you view the link with the Israeli Embassy as collusion in Israel’s recent and ongoing crimes
• such a link brings discredit on the Festival, the City and Scotland
• you will not participate in any of the events unless the Israeli Government money is returned
• you support the planned protest and calls for a boycott if the link with the Israeli Embassy is maintained
• you are not taking issue with any films being shown; it is opposition to accepting funding from a murderous regime

SPSC would appreciate being cc’d on any correspondence - please send to secretary@scottishpsc.org.uk This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

CONTACT THE EIFF:

Edinburgh International Film Festival
88 Lothian Road
Edinburgh EH3 9BZ
Tel: 00 44 (0)131 228 4051
Fax: 00 44 (0)131 229 5501
info@edfilmfest.org.uk

And here's a response from the Film Festival's MD:

From: Ginnie Atkinson [mailto: ginnie.atkinson@edfilmfest.org.uk This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it ]
Sent: 14 May 2009 10:16
To: secretary@scottishpsc.org.uk This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Subject:

We regret that you have found cause to express concern about a source of cultural funding.

We accept funding from a variety of international cultural institutions to enable filmmakers to travel with their work. It is important that filmmakers come with their films to engage in a dialogue with international audiences. The funding comes from cultural support agencies of one sort or another; national cultural institutes, consulates, embassies, and others. This year alone we have financial contributions from Denmark, Poland, Holland, Italy, Mexico, Romania, Germany, USA and France. We do not make these arrangements based on any allegiance or otherwise with the political regime in any given country. Choosing not to accept support from one particular country would set a dangerous precedent by politicising what is a wholly cultural and artistic mission. We are firm believers in free cultural exchange, and do not feel that ghettoising filmmakers or restricting their ability to communicate artistically on the basis that they come from a troubled territory is of any benefit. Nor do we see that filmmakers are voices of their government. It is particularly important in situations of strife and conflict that artists be supported in having their voices heard.

We hope this allays some, if not all, of your concerns.

Thank you.

Ginnie Atkinson
MD

And here's a response to the response which doesn't appear to be on line yet:

EIFF Managing Director refuses to address protesters concerns

Ginnie Atkinson responds to protest letters but fails to address the issues: <http://spsc.scottishpsc.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2877:response-from-edinburgh-international-film-festival&catid=262&Itemid=200090>read the letter

The Edinburgh International Film Festival (EIFF) has again accepted funding from the Israeli Embassy, while people in Gaza are still living in the rubble of their homes, and Gaza victims of Israel's white phosphorous attacks are still in critical care.

<http://spsc.scottishpsc.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2875:action-alert-the-edinburgh-international-film-festival-has-again-accepted-funding-from-the-israeli-embassy&catid=261&Itemid=200089>read the full action alert

Film make Ken Loach and George Galloway join growing protest:

Internationally acclaimed film-maker Ken Loach issued a statement yesterday calling on fellow artists and film festival fans to stay away from the festival this year, "I'm sure many film makers will be as horrified as I am to learn that the Edinburgh International Film Festival is accepting money from Israel. The massacres and state terrorism in Gaza make this money unacceptable. With regret, I must urge all who might consider visiting the festival to show their support for the Palestinian nation, and stay away".

George Galloway MP rebutted Atkinson's accusations and echoed Loach's call for a boycott, "If the film festival wants to continue to enjoy an outstanding international reputation it will not hesitate to return this tainted money to the Israeli embassy. I find it astonishing that a spokesperson for the festival accused those of us who want this money returned of 'ghettoising' film-makers. If there's a prize for satire at the festival, contestants need to know that the result is a foregone conclusion. It is Israel that is herding the Palestinian people into the ghetto and, in the case of Gaza earlier this year, bombing to smithereens those it had taken the precaution to lock in. If the festival does not do the right thing - morally, and commercially - then no self respecting artist or director should take part. Sense prevailed three years ago over this issue. I'm sure it will again."

PROTEST EIFF DECISION TO ACCEPT ISRAELI STATE SPONSORSHIP:

Saturday 16 May 2009, 2-4pm
Filmhouse, Lothian Road, Edinburgh

Bring your family, friends, banners and placards - join us in protest. Join the growing worldwide movement for boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel until it stops violating Palestinian human and national rights.

In March this year Palestinians in Israel were banned from celebrating 'Jerusalem as the Capital of Arab Culture for 2009' while 20 people were arrested, including two employees of Al Quds University, for organizing the 2009 cultural events. Join the protest tomorrow in solidarity with Palestinians living under occupation, apartheid and siege.

On the other hand, you might want to come to London.

Demonstration for Palestine Saturday 16th May 2009

That's tomorrow if you're reading this today which is 15th May 2009. Here's the notice of the demo on the Stop the War website:

• 1,400 dead • 5000 homes destroyed • Remember Gaza 16 May

Follow Stop the War on Twitter...

National Demonstration Saturday 16 May
Assemble 12noon Malet St London WC1E 7HY
March to Trafalgar Square

Free Palestine • End the Occupation • End the Arms Trade • Commemorate the 1948 Palestinian Nakba

Called by Palestine Solidarity Campaign, Stop the War Coalition, British Muslim Initiative, Palestinian Forum in Britain and CND and supported by...

Download leaflet here... Coaches to protest...

Speakers from Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem will be joined by: Lowkey MC, Mecca 2 Medina, Jeremy Hardy, Jeremy Corbyn MP, Martin Linton MP, George Galloway MP, Daud Abdullah - Deputy Gen Sec Muslim Council of Britain, Jean Lambert MEP, Jenny Tonge MEP, Manuel Hassassian - Palestinian General Delegate to the UK and speakers from PSC, Stop the War Coalition, British Muslim Initiative, CND, Palestinian Forum in Britain, Viva Palestina, Jews for Justice for Palestine, Lawyers for Palestinian Human Rights.

No war crimes in Gaza says Israel

The Israel Defense Force IDF) responsible for the barbaric invasion of Gaza looked at reports of attacks on civilians, infrastructure, medical personnel, hospitals, United Nations buildings, and at the use of white phosphorous. The IDF concluded that the IDF had "adhered to international law and maintained a high level of professionalism and morality."

Why then refuse to cooperate with the United Nations' investigation into Gaza war crimes? And why drop the probe into reports by its own soldiers that the IDF was guilty of war crimes?

The truth about Gaza

Every day from 27 December to 19 January this year Israel bombarded the Gaza Strip, home to 1.5 million Palestinians, from the land, sea and air. Nearly 1400 people were killed, 314 of them children, and thousands were wounded. Israel is seeking to justify its actions by broadcasting massive misinformation about the history of Gaza, its inhabitants and its leaders. Most of the media in the UK are either too ignorant or too intimidated to question these modern myths.

Read the truth, based on reports by the UN and other NGOs on the ground, including Israeli human rights groups...

Is talk about Israel's war crimes in Gaza no more than talk...

Gaza still waiting for pledged Aid

Palestine is the world's largest open air prison. All access and exits are closed. Israel is blocking $4.5 billion aid for Gaza. Meanwhile Israel gets $3bn aid annually (a third of all US foreign aid) to finance illegal settlements on Palestinian land and for armaments.

None of a $4.5 billion package of reconstruction aid pledged for the Gaza Strip after the three-week Israeli military onslaught has got through because of border restrictions, the UN reports.

Gaza had still not benefited from any of the aid because of restrictions on the flow of goods into the territory by both Israel and Egypt. "There is no prospect of recovery or reconstruction until we can get access for construction materials," says the UN, "Billions of dollars were pledged but none of that can actually connect with those whose lives were destroyed. The people of Gaza continue to subsist in the rubble of their former lives and the attention of the world has sadly moved on, which compounds the despair that people feel."

The Remember Gaza demonstration on 16 May is supported by:

Action Palestine, Amos Trust, Arab Media Watch, Arab Women’s Association, Association of Palestinian Communities UK, Britain-Palestine Twinning Network, The Council for Arab-British Understanding, Campaign Against the Arms Trade, Christian Peacemaker Teams UK, Fire Brigades Union, Friends of Al-Aqsa, Friends of Lebanon, Friends of Birzeit University, Friends of Sabeel UK, The Green Party, Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions UK, Jewish Socialists’ Group, Jews for Justice for Palestinians, Labour Friends of Palestine, Liberation, Midlands Palestinian Community Association, Muslim Association of Britain, Muslim Council for Britain, NUS Black Students Campaign, Palestinian Forum in Britain, Respect, Pax Christi, Public and Commercial Services Union, Rail Maritime and Transport Union, UNISON, UNITE, Viva Palestina, War on Want, Zaytoun Ltd

I know of no other meeting place for the various groups so if you want to march with a banner, a union, a group, whatever, just look for it on Malet Street around noon tomorrow.

Remembering Gaza

From youtube

Rugby: up or under in Palestine?

Someone at Bir Zeit University just sent me this clip of a rugby match in Taybeh village in the West Bank. Look at the pitch.



Such facilities they enjoy.

I'm not interested in sports myself but little things like rugby and soccer teams undermine zionist attempts to dehumanise the Palestinians. Remember this?

Howard Jacobson "on" zionism

I wouldn't have noticed this ludicrous piece by Howard Jacobson in Saturday's Independent but for the criticisms it attracted in yesterday's paper. Here's a chunk of Jacobson's piece:

Zionism was never a single movement, and whatever isn't a single movement cannot be said to have a single aim. A complex of ideologies, Utopian, messianic, visionary, practical, communistical, sometimes dreamily idealistic – Jews and Arabs working the land side by side – sometimes just plain desperate, came together (and indeed didn't always do that) to form that which we call Zionism. Far from uniformly expressing Jewish expansionist ambitions, Zionists agreed only on the necessity to escape the grinding fretfulness of an unceasing anti-Semitism and to end the overwrought Jewish self-awareness of which anti-Semitism was the cause. Living with Arabs, not dispossessing them, was to be a way of achieving this.

And here are Monday's letters:

Israel's agenda for the Palestinians

Howard Jacobson is right ("A letter to an anti-Semite who isn't", 9 May). There are undoubtedly Israelis who would not hurt a fly. Ditto Palestinians. But he is obfuscating the main thrust of Zionism.

Its founding father, Theodore Herzl, favoured the transfer of Palestinians. Israel's first President, Chaim Weizmann, wanted Palestine "to be as Jewish as England is English and Poland is Polish". How could that be achieved when 90 per cent of Palestinians were Muslim or Christian? So he leaped at the idea of transfer too.

Israel's first Prime Minster, David Ben Gurion, established a Transfer Committee in 1936 to study how transfer could be achieved. And he was angered in 1948 that commanders in Galilee failed to ensure the departure of its native population. And when the chance was there in 1948 to allow the Arab peasantry to return to their villages, the UN mediator found Israel's leadership unyielding, "as hard as rock".

Today two-thirds of its Jewish electorate cannot accept the prospect that Israel's growing minority might one day outnumber Jews. Transfer is openly discussed.

Ahmedinejad's words may be odious but they are a distraction. So is Holocaust denial. I share Jacobson's disgust at both, but he should stop using them to distract us from Israel's fell agenda for its captive people.

David McDowall

Richmond, Surrey

Howard Jacobson asserts that no one who has read the history of Zionism will be aware that the aim of Zionism "was to dispossess the Arabs". Well he should read what Golda Meir had to say on the subject. In 1969, the Prime Minister of Israel addressed the question of Israeli settlement policy: "There is no such thing as Palestinians. It is not as though there was a Palestinian people and we came and threw them out and took their country away from them. They did not exist."

So, perhaps this explains why Jacobson is so sure that there is no need to dispossess the Arabs.

Michael Hirst

Pangbourne, Berkshire

Howard Jacobson, in his thoughtful meditation on anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism, refers to "Primo Levi's greatest dread – that those who suffered would never be believed". Ah yes, the Primo Levi who said: "Someone is always someone's Jew, and the Palestinians are the Jews of the Israelis", not a remark an Auschwitz survivor is likely to have made in jest.

Thomas Tallon

York

Hmm, Howard Jacobson, thoughtful and meditative?

As it happens, whilst there are benign forms of zionist thought, anything that argues for living space specifically for Jews, is indeed racist and it is Jacobson that knows it, or he's a fool if he doesn't. He should have really muddied the waters with time-wasting talk about cultural and linguistic zionism but maybe he really is an ignoramous and not just pretending.

Seven Jewish children and possibly some Jewish grown-ups too

Oh my goodness, antisemitism is coming to the Hackney Empire in a big way. Not only are they showing 7 Jewish children: a play for Gaza, but also they are showing The Trainer which I think might also depict a Jew, maybe more than one.

Here's the notice on the Stop the War site:

Tony Benn introduces Two Plays for Gaza

Hackney Empire 291 Mare Street London, E8 1EJ
Thursday 21 May 2009 at 7.30 pm

Performed by Tim Pigott-Smith, Janie Dee, Jana Zeineddine, Roger Lloyd Pack and others.
Plus music by Reem Kelani and rap artist Lowkey (Long Live Palestine...)

Tickets £15 Book online: Book Online or call the Box Office on 020 89852424
Two Plays for Gaza on Facebook and Twitter

Seven Jewish Children. Photograph: Tristram Kenton

Seven Jewish Children

Caryl Churchill's 10-minute play about the attack on Gaza was first performed at the Royal Court Theatre in February 2009.

In seven scenes parents, grandparents and relatives debate how much children should know and not know: from the Holocaust to the foundation of the state of Israel, through the many Middle East wars, up to this year's invasion of Gaza.

Caryl Churchill will present her play with the original cast from the Royal Court production.

"Shows theatre's power to heighten consciousness and articulate moral outrage." - The Guardian. Read review here

Seven Jewish Children: Moral outrage? Or anti-semitism?...

The Trainer. Photograph Guy Smallman

The Trainer

The Trainer – is a surreal comedy about the ‘terror’ laws as they descend into farce. Composer Keith Burstein sues the Evening Standard after being accused of 'glorifying' terror in his opera, Manifest Destiny. When his case goes to the Appeal Court, the judges go to a gym to exercise between court sessions. The gym trainer is Leila, a young Palestinian woman.

"Gripping drama. A passionate and telling condemnation of an injustice made possible by the anti-terrorism laws." - Michael Kustow, theatre director, former Channel 4 arts commissioner

Staged reading directed by Tom Platten.

Here's the blurb from the Hackney Empire itself:

The Trainer explores the love story between a British Jew, Josh, and his Palestinian fiancée, Taghreed, who works in a gentlemen's gym. Their story is interwoven with the bankrupting of composer, Keith Burstein, who was accused of "glorifying terrorism" in his opera, Manifest Destiny. The Trainer casts a sly, satiric look at the absurdity of many of the UK's terror laws. This eclectic, contemporary drama uses a multimedia approach with excerpts from Manifest Destiny, film footage and TV interviews with a terrorism "expert". You will laugh and cry about the savagery and stupidity of the times we are living in. The star cast includes Janie Dee, fresh from her starring role in Alan Ayckbourn's A Woman in Mind at the Vaudeville and Roger Lloyd Pack, "Trigger" from Only Fools and Horses. Corin Redgrave, who appeared at the first sold-out rehearsed reading in March said, "The Trainer takes the scandal of an artist bankrupted by the state . . . and brilliantly exposes the threat to our freedoms and civil liberties."

I would have posted this sooner but I wanted to make sure I had my tickets first, which I now have.

Enjoy!! erm, if you can get tickets.

Look familiar?

Well, does it look familiar? I don't mean does this depiction of Gaza remind anyone of the nazis rounding up Jews in Warsaw. Far be it from me to breach the US State Department's and European Union Monitoring Committee's bogus guidelines on antisemitism. Who needs that aggravation?



Nope, what it is is, I downloaded the picture and then my pc crashed and, you know when Firefox asks you if you want to restore your session but you don't want to in case it caused the crash in the first place? Yes? Well I didn't restore the session and I can't find the website which I got the pic from.

So, without breaching hasbara guidelines on antisemitism, does anyone know the origin of the picture? You know, who drew it, where it first appeared, that sort of thing.

Thanks!

PEN mightier than the Foreign Office?

Apparently not but we don't know which Foreign Office. See this just in from Michael Rosen:

On May 22 I was due to do a reading for P.E.N., the organisation that supports writers who have been silenced or censored. It was going to be an evening of Palestinian poetry. However, I've just had a call telling me that it's been cancelled because none of the Palestinian poets who were due to come over could get travel documents.

I don't understand exactly how Palestinians get or don't get documents that enable them to visit the UK, but some of the writers tried doing it through Egypt, others another way. Either way, they couldn't get the documents in time. This seems to be because the British consulates or embassies (sorry to be not more specific) wouldn't give them the documents.

The do is now cancelled. In other words the very organisation that exists to give voice to silenced writers is itself being silenced as it does its job. For the time being, I see that P.E.N. isn't making a fuss about this. I'm not sure why not.

That's all I know for the moment.

Ok, I want this posted in a hurry so I'll publish it now while I go away and see what I can find on the PEN website.

UPDATE: Ok, it's now half past midnight, Sunday morning, 10th May 2009 and I still don't know what P.E.N stands for in any sense. Whilst looking Michael Rosen has updated us on precisely what has been cancelled but we still don't exactly know why:

Here are the details of the event that has been cancelled.

The following event (see below) has been cancelled due, apparently, the organiser told me, because the Palestinian poets couldn't get the necessary travel documents. It's not clear at present whether this is because of Israeli or British interference or both.

Refuge in Words
Friday 22 May, 7pm
Venue: The Brunei Gallery, SOAS, Thornhaugh St, Russell Square, London, WC1H 0XG
The Palestine Film Foundation, English PEN and the Poetry Translation Centre invite you to join us for an evening of poetry and short fiction from Palestine celebrating the publication of new work in translation from Gaza commissioned by the English PEN World Atlas. Faten al-Gharra will share her erotic, meditative, vivid poems and Khaled Abedallah will read his bold new poetry; their translations will be read by Sarah Maguire. Atef Abu Seif and Khaled Juma'a will present their work via video from Gaza, while Michael Rosen, our MC, will read his translations of Juma'a's resonant lyrics, including new work from 2009. Also via video, John Berger reads Ghassan Kanafani's classic Letter from Gaza. And there will be a chance to talk to the writers about their work and life in Gaza.

Except there won't be now.

Ok, apparently P.E.N stands for Poets, Essayists and Novelists and it campaigns against censorship, particularly in peace time (wassat?). I'll keep you posted on how they respond to this form of censorship.

UPDATE II: Cock-up not conspiracy, shock! Just in from one of the organisers of the event:

nothing actually that exciting Mark, Michael - no conspiracy or FCO intrigue (which is not to say they're exactly helpful either). The event is cancelled due to delay, confusion and disorganisation on our part - not obstruction from the FCO; no one was prevented from getting a visa. Sorry this was not made clear to you by PEN Michael.
Nick, PFF, London (a co-(non)-organiser of the misfiring event).

Ok, apologies to PEN. I'm not apologising to the FCO.

JC poll on AZ and AS

There's a ludicrous poll on the home page of the Jewish Chronicle website. Here's the question:

Are the anti-Zionists really antisemites?

The choices are yes or no. There is no "it all depends", no "maybe" and no "don't know". There is no explanation of what zionism is or what the Jewish Chronicle means by zionism. And yet according to the question there is only one form of anti-zionism, hence "the anti-Zionists".

Well the result so far is, to me anyway, quite surprising.


Yes
54% (108 votes)
No
46% (91 votes)
Total votes: 199

Ok, the anti-zionists are antisemitic according to 54% of 199 people, assuming none voted twice which wouldn't be that easy for most people.

Something you might want to consider is the fact that a lot of Jews won't go on line between sundown Friday and sundown Saturday, it's a sabbath thing. So maybe the poll will change a lot between today and tomorrow.

They shoot children, don't they?

Just in from Just Peace. According to Monthly Review there has been a fly poster campaign in and around University College Berkeley campus. Here's the poster:



You could click on the pic to read the wording or see right here:

"For over eight years, Israel has been under siege. Unarmed Palestinian children have led the attack by crossing Israeli checkpoints, intimidating Israeli troops and provoking gunfire. Acting with extreme restraint, Israelis have killed no more than 1,100 children and seriously wounded only 4,000. Israeli troops have arrested over 6,000 children, but only 80% have been tortured. . . .

"With your continued support we can do better. The U.S. government gave us $5 billion last year, but your additional contributions will help us arrest every Palestinian child, torture 100% of detainees, and rid ourselves of the menace of international human rights workers once and for all. In these tough economic times, think of Israel on April 15th and give generously."

But if you click on the poster you could reproduce it.

Apparently the posters are being pasted over adverts for students to study in Israeli colleges:

The Study in Israel billboards were carefully designed to appeal to the U.C. system's multicultural student body. One featured a group of Southeast Asians and another a women in hijab (traditional Muslim head covering). One of the artists behind the alternative campaign finds this portrayal of Israel as a society that is welcoming to people of all cultures particularly troubling. "Not only is Israel an apartheid state, where Palestinians -- whether they wear hijab or not -- do not have equal rights with Jewish citizens, but Muslims who attempt to travel there as tourists or students are very likely not even to be allowed into the country," the artist observed.***

MR has this to say of the "guerilla ads":

While the guerrilla ads are not affiliated with any organization, www.stopthewall.org, www.bdsmovement.net, and www.whoprofits.org are excellent sources of information.

I've nothing to add to that.

***Woops, I do have something to add to that. I've had a complaint that

"Muslims study freely and are allowed entry into and out of israel.

This 'artist" has no idea what is going on in or out of Israel.

He/she finds it "very likely" ...what? he/she has not bothered to find out? Oh but why look for reality when you've got a nice packaged little story you can put on a poster, even if it's a lie?"

I cut the first thing that "Jill" said because it was just a little bit rude and this is a family blog. I simply responded to say that it's not actually as straightforward as "Jill" is saying, wrongness doesn't amount to dishonesty and that the poster itself is sound. I told her that I would link to her comment in the post itself which I have now done. Then it occurred to me, she only complained about the stuff about Muslims studying in Israel. It didn't occur to her to deny Israel's targeting and killing of children. Not just another shrill "Jill". A woman of the highest integrity. I do hope she comes again to keep on the straight and narrow.

Now Congress goes to the circus

Ok, it's a different circus but it's for the same "cause":



Check out the way the senators try Hebrew greetings and slogans. They look like Vulcans greeting earthlings or maybe it's the other way round.

Incidentally, like another piece of caricaturing, this is being circulated by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency.

Benedict goes to the circus

The Pope is going to visit the Yad Vashem, kindly known as Israel's holocaust museum but otherwise known as the holocaust circus. Here's Rory McCarthy in today's Guardian:

Israel's Holocaust museum, Yad Vashem, is housed within an angular concrete ­corridor that leads visitors through appalling stories of persecution, suffering and death and out eventually to a calming view over the Jerusalem forests.

Now I love a happy ending as much as the next person but see this Ha'aretz article from a few weeks ago:

Yad Vashem has fired a guide over political differences, an institution official said Wednesday.

Shapira confirmed, in a telephone conversation with Haaretz, that he had spoken to visitors about the 1948 massacre at Deir Yassin.

He said he did so because the ruins of the Arab village, today a part of Jerusalem's Givat Shaul neighborhood, can be seen as one leaves Yad Vashem.

Hmm, not so calming then.

Defend Ezra Nawi!

Nawi is an Arab-Jewish gay Ta'ayush activist threatened with jail for peacefully obstructing the criminal demolition of a Palestinian shack. He is picked upon because Israeli authorities feel particularly threatened by acts of solidarity with Palestinians coming from people of working class, non-Ashkenazi background (as was the case with Tali Fahima). His sexual orientation makes him also particularly vulnerable.

The solidarity campaign for Ezra Nawi asks:

To support Ezra, please write a letter or email to the Israeli embassy in your country, and send us a copy to support.ezra@gmail.com

Also please consider donating to help defray the legal costs and to support his human rights activities.  (http://www.supportezra.net/ )

More about Nawi here and here. We need more people like Nawi, and the place to start is to defend the ones we have. Start now!