politics of the same in the zionist entity

nimer sultany published an article in electronic intifada this week that lays out, in a lucid fashion, just why all this furor over avigdor liberman is not warranted as his politics are particularly unusual in israel’s terrorist society:

First, one needs to be reminded that among Yisrael Beiteinu’s elected members of the Knesset are men who come from the establishment, for example, a former ambassador to the US and a former senior commander in the police force.

Second, in the negotiations that followed elections day there was a wide range of agreement not only between the Likud of Benjamin Netanyahu and Lieberman, but also the Kadima party of current Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and Lieberman. Both sides were trying to convince him to join their own coalition. Needless to say, both Lieberman and Kadima emerged in the last decade as an offspring of the Likud.

Third, Ehud Barak of the Labor party rejected before the elections some of his senior party members’ demand to promise not to join a coalition that would include Lieberman. Even worse, Barak claimed that Lieberman talks the talk but does not walk the walk as he never “shot anyone” thereby implying that he himself is the tough guy since he did actually kill Arabs in his past.

Fourth, Lieberman’s central idea of land swap or population swap that would include Palestinian citizens of Israel and his view of this minority as a demographic and strategic threat to the self-proclaimed Jewish state are actually not controversial among the major parties and elites in Israel. The question of Palestinian citizenship in a Jewish state started long before Lieberman emerged on the scene and used incitement against the Palestinian citizens to gain more votes. Indeed, many prominent Israeli academics and politicians have expressed support of these ideas including Ariel Sharon, Benjamin Netanyahu, Elie Yishai of the Shas party, Ephraim Sneh of Labor, journalist Dan Margalit and historian Benny Morris. To give one example, Ehud Barak said in his June 2002 interview with Benny Morris in The New York Review of Books that the Arab citizens will serve as the “spear point” of the Palestinian struggle, and that this would require changes in the rules of the “democratic game” to guarantee the “Jewishness” of the state. He also expressed support for a land swap that would include large Arab concentrations inside Israel because it makes “demographic sense.”

To give another example, on 23 January 2002 Livni urged members of the Knesset to reject an “equal protection clause” according to which equality is the right of every citizen in the state regardless of his or her nationality or religion or views. Indeed, the proposed bill was rejected and formal equality remains outside the Israeli book of laws. She also supported “settlement and allocation of land for Jews only” bills in the Knesset. Finally, she repeatedly argued that Israel will never be the national home for its Palestinian citizens, and if they have a collective aspiration they should look for it somewhere else.

Fifth, this is not the first time that Lieberman has become a cabinet minister in Israel. In fact he served as the minister of national infrastructure (2001-02), minister of transportation (2003-04), and then more recently as the minister for strategic affairs (2006-08).

Sixth, Lieberman is not the first or only outspoken proponent of expulsion of the Palestinians to serve in the government. In fact, Rehavam Ze’evi of the racist Moledet party was a minister without portfolio (1991-92), and then again as a minister of tourism (2001) in the Sharon government until he was assassinated by Palestinians, only to be replaced by Benjamin Elon of the same party and with the same views. Ze’evi was more principled in this issue than Lieberman. Notable in this context is that the Israeli legislator enacted a law to commemorate Ze’evi’s “legacy” after his assassination.

al jazeera has had a couple of reports today about ehud barak joining lieberman and netanyahu’s new government in the israeli terrorist state. oddly, regardless of the journalist reporting on the story, barak and his labor party are considered “left of center” or as somehow inherently, ideologically different. akiva eldar has an op ed in ha’aretz today that offers a mild version of how these parties and their leaders are two sides of the same coin:

Any remaining doubts Pines-Paz may have harbored about Barak and his principles have now been dispelled, especially after he read Monday’s report in Haaretz that the defense minister decided to approve a new settlement (Sansana) and refused to uphold a court order to dismantle houses built on stolen land in the Ofra settlement.

“It is completely natural for Barak to want to join the Bibi-Lieberman government,” said Pines-Paz, the only MK who left Ehud Olmert’s government after Yisrael Beiteinu’s Avigdor Lieberman joined it. “He doesn’t have a problem with their ideology. Perhaps you can remind me how many outposts Barak has evacuated so far and how exactly he abided by the Talia Sasson report [on settlement construction]?” (Last week marked four years since the government’s decision to appoint a ministerial committee to recommend steps to implement the report within 90 days.)

If his party colleagues, including Labor Secretary-General Eitan Cabel and Pines-Paz, find fault with their leader’s reliability, how can foreigners be expected to believe the defense minister? If he doesn’t have a qualms about misleading his political partners , why should he have a problem spreading fabrications about the Palestinian (no) partners?

Barak’s deceptive conduct casts a different light on the Rashomon-like reports surrounding his negotiations, while prime minister, with the Syrians and the Palestinians. Why should we prefer Barak’s version, according to which he dragged Yasser Arafat to Camp David “in order to reveal his true face,” over the version of three senior intelligence officials who said they had warned Barak that there was no chance Arafat would be satisfied with his “generous offer”? And why should we believe Barak that Hafez Assad should be blamed for the failure of the negotiations with Syria and cast doubts on the accounts of the three American mediators, who allege that Barak was the one who got cold feet?

an al jazeera report by ayman mohyeldin shows that this government already made an agreement to build 3,000 new colonies in palestine:

and yet al jazeera reports that netanyahu is a partner for “peace”:

In a speech on Wednesday, a day after he secured the support of the rival Labor party to form a coalition, Netanyahu said that peace was a “common and enduring goal for all Israelis and Israeli governments, mine included”.

“This means I will negotiate with the Palestinian Authority for peace,” he said.

“I think that the Palestinians should understand that they have in our government a partner for peace, for security and for rapid economic development of the Palestinian economy.”

here is the agreement discussed in the al jazeera clip above about the agreement signed allowing for the expansion of israeli terrorists’ colonies in palestine:

Prime Minister-designate Benjamin Netanyahu has struck a secret deal with Yisrael Beiteinu leader Avigdor Lieberman for highly contentious construction on West Bank land known as E1, Army Radio reported Wednesday.

A source close to the negotiations between the pair told Army Radio that the plan had been agreed upon even though it did not appear in the official document detailing the coalition deal between Yisrael Beiteinu and Netanyahu’s Likud.

The plan is for the West Bank settlement of Ma’aleh Adumim to build 3000 new housing units on the territory, which stretches between it and Jerusalem, the source was quoted as saying.

Construction in the area is particularly sensitive because it would create contiguity between the settlement and the capital, which in turn would prevent Palestinian construction between East Jerusalem and Ramallah.

yes, this is a man of “peace” in the zionist entity where everything is upside down and backwards. you see, when they say “peace,” what they really mean is stealing more land, murdering more palestinians, building more colonies.

and yet saeb erekat said today that he still supports this bantustan two-state khara:

Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat stressed on Tuesday that any Israeli government to be formed must declare its commitment to the two-state solution.

here is what erekat is actually working for with his wholesale abandonment of the liberation of palestine for a ever-decreasing enclave of bantustans that he somehow in his deluded world thinks is a “state.” this is from the satirical paper the onion:

WEST BANK—In a historic breakthrough in the struggle for peace in the Middle East, Israeli and PLO leaders settled on a large ground-floor room in a West Bank office building to be used as a Palestinian homeroom. “Finally, we, the people of Palestine, have a room to call our own, a place where we can go at the beginning of each day to take attendance and listen to announcements,” PLO leader Yasser Arafat said. The PLO held out until the 11th hour of negotiations, insisting that all Palestinians be permitted to talk quietly in their new homeroom.

but it is not just the land theft and the colonies that makes barak the same as the others. they are all terrorists. those war crimes we witnessed in gaza, which are continuing to be revealed by westerners now (because, of course, unless the west comes in and tells us these are war crimes it doesn’t count) were perpetrated by barak. even human rights watch–at the risk of losing its zionist donors–released a strong report today documenting war crimes committed by barak & co. rory mccarthy had this to say about it in the guardian:

Israel’s military fired white phosphorus over crowded areas of Gaza repeatedly and indiscriminately in its three-week war, killing and injuring civilians and committing war crimes, Human Rights Watch said today.

In a 71-page report, the rights group said the repeated use of air-burst white phosphorus artillery shells in populated areas of Gaza was not incidental or accidental, but revealed “a pattern or policy of conduct”.

It said the Israeli military used white phosphorus in a “deliberate or reckless” way. The report says:

• Israel was aware of the dangers of white phosphorus.

• It chose not to use alternative and less dangerous smoke shells.

• In one case, Israel even ignored repeated warnings from UN staff before hitting the main UN compound in Gaza with white phosphorus shells on 15 January.

you can download the report at the human rights watch website by clicking on this link.

and for those of you who did not see the guardian report on war crimes committed by israeli terrorists (i wrote about this in a post below), here is the film, which is finally on youtube:

this is the work not only of the israeli terrorist leadership who carried out these war crimes or who build these colonies. this is the work of all israeli terrorist society, all of whom are terrorists. never forget that 94% of that population, who live on stolen land, supported these war crimes 100%.

30 years…

…this is the sentence for ahmad sa’adat. this is what the zionist regime does: it spends its christmas holiday (mind you it is not their holiday) sentencing a freedom fighter to 30 years in an israeli jail:

The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine strongly denounced the appalling lengthy sentence meted out to General Secretary of the PFLP, Comrade Leader Ahmad Sa’adat, on December 25, 2008, by the occupation military court at Ofer prison. The occupation court, an illegitimate institution meant to impose the occupier upon our people, sentenced Comrade Sa’adat to 30 years inside the Zionist prisons.

why is he in jail? that is a good question. the zionist regime originally sentenced him to one charge and when they couldn’t find any evidence they changed the charge to some ambiguous, vague charge:

“Ahmed Saadat is guilty … because of his position and activities within the (PFLP) terrorist movement,” an Israeli army statement said on Thursday.

“Given the status of the accused within this terrorist organisation, given the actions put in place to develop the movement’s military structures and given that … the fighters (of the organisation) were under his command, the court sentences him to 30 years in prison,” the statement said.

When Israeli forces seized Saadat in March 2006 in a controversial raid on a Palestinian-run prison in Jericho, he stood accused of planning the 2001 murder of Rehavam Zeevi, Israel’s tourism minister at the time.

Prosecutors later decided not to pursue this case against Saadat, instead pressing the charges against four PFLP fighters who were seized along with him in Jericho.

here is background on sa’adat and the bogus nature of the case itself, including american and british involvement in his kidnapping:

Born in 1953, Sa’adat is the child of refugees expelled from their home in the village of Deir Tarif, near Ramleh, in 1948. A math teacher by training, he is married to Abla Sa’adat, herself a noted activist, and is the father of four children. Abla Sa’adat was herself arrested and detained for four months, and prevented from leaving Palestine to speak about Palestinian rights at an international conference. He has been involved in the Palestinian national movement since 1967, when he became active in the student movement. Prior to his abduction from Jericho in 2006, he had been held at various times as a political prisoner in Israeli jails, for a total of ten years. Sa’adat was elected General Secretary of the PFLP in 2001, following the Israeli assassination of then-General Secretary Abu Ali Mustafa in his office in Ramallah on August 27, 2001.

Sa’adat had been held in a Palestinian Authority prison for over four years, and, in January 2006, elected to the Palestinian Legislative Council on the Abu Ali Mustafa slate, when on March 14, 2006, the Israeli military stormed that prison at Jericho, abducting Sa’adat and five fellow prisoners and taking them to Israeli military prisons. For the entire period of Sa’adat’s imprisonment in Israeli and PA jails, he has been convicted of no crime; his trial – in an illegitimate military court of occupation – is beginning only now, after a combined total of over five years of detention.

This trial is, of course, a military trial, as are the trials of nearly all Palestinian political prisoners, presided over by three military judges, two of which are not required to have any legal background. These trials are based on military law, including military regulations that may be issued at any time by the Israeli military commander over the area. This military rule under occupation dates from the era of the British occupation of Palestine, in which these “emergency” military rules were adopted in order to suppress the Palestinian national movement for independence and self-determination. These military laws continue today for the same purpose – to continue a military occupation and suppress the indigenous people of Palestine’s struggle for liberation and self-determination. Such military trials generally fail to uphold international standards for fair trials. At a more basic level, they are an illegitimate manifestation of an illegitimate system – trials that, by their very nature, can never be fair or legitimate.

Sa’adat is the child of 1948 refugees who, with six million others in Palestine, in the camps outside Palestine and in exile around the world, are denied their right to return to their homes, lands and properties and denied their right to organize, struggle and act to obtain their freedom, their return and their liberation.

JERICHO ASSAULT AND ABDUCTION

On March 14, 2006, the Israeli army laid siege for twelve hours to the Palestinian prison at Jericho holding six political prisoners. Israeli bulldozers and tanks attacked the prison while the Israeli military issued threats of assassination against the prisoners. This military assault caused the death of two Palestinians, the injury of twenty-three more, and the abduction of Ahmad Sa’adat and five other political prisoners from Jericho to Zionist prisons.

For over four years, these men had been held in the Palestinian Authority prison at Jericho, under U.S. and British guards. Immediately prior to the Israeli assault on the prison, these U.S. and British guards abandoned their posts, clearing the way for the military attack. The U.S. State Department blamed Palestinians for the siege, stating that the democratically-elected Palestinian Legislative Council leadership had indicated its willingness to release these illegally-held political prisoners. Said Sa’adat in a letter to the Palestinian people after his abduction, “The Quartet [US, EU, Russia and UN] provide a cover for occupation. What happened in Jericho Prison has made the British and US governments an integral part of the conflict and forever buried any illusions in their neutrality.”

Since his abduction – a blatant violation of Palestinian sovereignty – Sa’adat’s trial has been repeatedly postponed and delayed. Israeli Attorney General Menachem Mazuz admitted shortly following the abduction that there was insufficient evidence to indict Sa’adat in the assassination of extreme racist Israeli minister Rehavam Ze’evi in 2001, an act of retaliation for the August 2001 Israeli murder of PFLP General Secretary Abu Ali Mustafa. Instead, Sa’adat was indicted on a wide array of political charges in a hearing on March 28, 2006 at Ofer Military Base in Ramallah.

Sa’adat has consistently and repeatedly refused to recognize the legitimacy of the illegitimate court; his lawyers have petitioned for the charges to be dropped, as they are clearly politically motivated and the court itself is illegitimate. His trial has been repeatedly postponed, from May 2006, to September 2006, to January 2007, to May 2007, and now to July/August 2008. With each hearing, Sa’adat’s courageous refusal to recognize in any way the illegitimate court – refusing to stand for the military judges, issuing statements exposing this mockery of justice, and refusing to deal with the military courts or interrogators – stand in clear contrast to the system of occupation and oppression represented by the military courts, exposing its bankruptcy and illegitimacy.

PA/BRITISH/US IMPRISONMENT

On August 27, 2001, PFLP General Secretary Abu Ali Mustafa was assassinated by a missile shot from an Apache helicopter by the Israeli military as he worked in his office in Ramallah. This assassination was the latest in a long line of assassinations by the Israeli state of Palestinian political leaders, a policy that continues to this day. Following the murder of Abu Ali Mustafa, Ahmad Sa’adat was elected General Secretary of the PFLP.

Rehavam Ze’evi, the tourism minister in Ariel Sharon’s Israeli government, represented the Moledet party, an extreme racist party whose program is based on the expulsion and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from all of Palestine. Ze’evi, whose long military career included involvement in the war of 1948 and the expulsion of nearly a million Palestinian refugees from their homes and lands, continued his quest to uproot the Palestinian people through the Israeli military and political system throughout his career, referring to Palestinians as “a cancer” and “lice.” In retaliation for the murder of Abu Ali Mustafa, on October 17, 2001, fighters from the PFLP’s armed wing assassinated Ze’evi in the Hyatt hotel in Jerusalem.

Israel continued its campaign of mass terror against the Palestinian people, attacking Palestinian cities and towns, including the town of Beit Rima, where the Israeli military killed nine Palestinians while purportedly searching for Sa’adat. Israel repeatedly demanded that the Palestinian Authority crack down on the PFLP and arrest its leaders and members, threatening the PA leadership if it refused to act on behalf of the Israeli military to repress the Palestinian resistance. Nonetheless, yielding to the demands of Israel, the U.S. and Britain, on January 15, 2002, Sa’adat attended a meeting with PA security under false pretenses, from which he was abducted and taken to the Muqata’a compound in Ramallah, then-Palestinian President Yasser Arafat’s headquarters. In February 2002, four of Sa’adat’s comrades in the PFLP, Ahmed Ghoulmi, Majdi Rimawi, Hamdi Qu’ran and Basel al-Asmar, were also arrested by PA security services and brought to the Muqata’a.

In March and April of 2002, Israeli military forces laid siege to the Muqata’a, and as demanded by the United States and Great Britain as a condition for the end of Israel’s siege of the Muqata’a, Sa’adat, Ghoulmi, Rimawi, Qu’ran, al-Asmar and Fuad Shoubaki would be transferred to the PA’s prison at Jericho to be held as political prisoners.

On April 25, 2002, Ghoulmi, Rimawi, Qu’ran and al-Asmar were tried in an impromptu military court of the Palestinian Authority inside the besieged Muqata’a. With Israeli tanks directly outside the Muqata’a, Quran, Al-Asmar, Rimawi and Gholmi were tried and sentenced for the Ze’evi assassination. Despite their civilian status, the four were tried before a military court presided over by Brigadier-General Ribhi Arafat, who had no legal standing to act as a judge. They were not allowed to have attorneys or proper legal defense in a trial that took a total of two hours. No evidence, no confessions and no statements were received in order to convict the four; all were found guilty and the verdicts immediately ratified by PA President Yasser Arafat, and the four were given no right to appeal the verdicts.

Ahmad Sa’adat was never charged nor tried for any crime. After the sentencing, the four were transferred on May 1, 2002, with the uncharged and untried Sa’adat, to Jericho Prison, ostensibly under the control of the PA, but subject to the guardianship of United States and British forces. On May 2, 2002, Israeli forces withdrew from the Muqata’a. The director of the US/British “supervision” of the prisoners at Jericho Prison formerly ran the infamous Maze Detention Center for Britain in the occupied North of Ireland. The prisoners were not subject to Palestinian sovereignty and authority, but rather to the conditions and demands of the United States and Great Britain. Sa’adat and his comrades were held under difficult conditions in Jericho prison, often secluded from one another and not allowed to communicate, denied access to newspapers, books, recreation and family and other visits. Water and electricity in their cells have been turned off, and numerous other punitive measures were implemented against them by the British and U.S. guards “monitoring” the prison. In response, Sa’adat and his comrades have engaged in two hunger strikes, demanding an end to inhumane treatment and their immediate release.

The Palestinian High Court of Justice, the highest Palestinian judicial body, ruled on June 3, 2002 that Sa’adat should be released immediately. Numerous Palestinian and international human rights organizations, including Amnesty International, called for the release of Sa’adat and the implementation of Palestinian and international law. Nevertheless, Sa’adat was never released; the PA refused to comply with the orders of its own judiciary, the U.S., Britain, and Israel demanded he remain held as a political prisoner, and the PA complied with their demands. While Sa’adat was imprisoned in Jericho, on August 20, 2002, the Israeli military assassinated his brother Mohammed, illustrating the continuing campaign of assassination and murder on the part of the Israeli regime. Sa’adat – and his fellow political prisoners – remained in Jericho prison in 2006, until the Israeli siege on the prison.

and here is sa’adat’s statement given today at the time of his sentencing:

At the outset, I do not stand to defend myself in front of your court has already confirmed that I do not recognize the legitimacy of this court as an extension of the illegal occupation under international law, and as well as the legitimacy of our people’s right to resist occupation, and that this court is based on the British emergency laws of 1945 about which one of one of the leaders of the Zionist Labor Party said after their approval, It is one of the worst of the Nazi laws. He added, “It is true that the Nazi crimes committed did not reach the degree of crime of this legislation.

So I stand to defend my people and their legitimate right to national independence and self-determination and return. These rights are guaranteed by international law and humanitarian law and the resolutions of the United Nations, as well as the most recent recommendations of the Hague Tribunal on the wall.

I defend the right of our people to peace and stability not only in this region, but also in the whole world. Security and stability can never be achieved in Palestine or in the region and the world as long as there is a policy based on the logic of the occupation and imposition of things on people, whether by force through military invasion or occupation, as in Palestine.

I stand before this court again today, as a mechanism for the suppression of our people and a tool of oppression, that is unable to end the resistance and is an example of the inability of the occupation and its policies imposed on the peoples to do so. If you review the files of the prisoners of the Zionist occupation of Palestine, you will find that many of the prisoners are held a second time or a third time, because this mechanism has failed to deter our people or our activists fighting for our rights.

This, like many other examples of the failure of the occupation and its tools to suppress of our people and abolish our resistance, and these courts, will remain as long as the occupation exists and will also remain in the resistance of our people.

The existing policy of the occupation and the logic of imposing by force will not bring security to Israel or other countries engaged in occupation. The main route to achieve security, stability and peace in the region is to end the occupation and the implementation of the resolutions of international legitimacy for the Palestinian cause, to provide a climate in which a democratic, peaceful and humane solution to the Palestinian crisis and the Arab-Zionist conflict is established from the roots is the only way to end violence and bloodshed.

Finally, I have already stressed in my previous statements from the so-called indictment, to the trial that has been formulated, and now reiterate the same position after your court concluded, that this is one-sided and farcical way to achieve its resolution under a mere image of a “court.” The convictions were known in advance, and pre-determined by the terms of the political and security mechanism, which is made “legitimate” by the court.

The essence of my position is that I am proud of the Palestinian people and their political and national resistance and their just struggle to achieve their national rights and also I am proud of the trust given me by the Central Committee of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, by electing me as Secretary-General, and I’m sorry that I have not yet been able to fully perform my duties, first: because of the detention of the Palestinian Authority and the loss of my freedoms to work for more than four years, and second because of this abduction, in which more than one party – the U.S., Britain and the Palestinian Authority – were complicit; and notwithstanding anything that could hamper you or force you, you cannot stop the struggle, along with my people, in whatever space of movement.

Long live the struggle of the Palestinian people!

Ahmad Sa’adat
December 25, 2008

click here for more information about how you can help fight for justice for ahmad sa’adat.