"Stop blaming Israel and wake up: The black flag of jihad is the REAL threat to the world"

[OriZ 3,157]

S

heikh Ahmad Adwan, who introduces himself as a Muslim scholar who lives in Jordan, said on his personal Facebook page that there is no such thing as “Palestine” in the Koran. Allah has assigned the Holy Land to the Children of Israel until the Day of Judgment (Koran, Sura 5 - “The Sura of the Table”, Verse 21), and “We made the Children of Israel the inheritors (of the land)” (Koran, Sura 26 - “The Sura of the Poets”, Verse 59).

“I say to those who distort their Lord’s book, the Koran: From where did you bring the name Palestine, you liars, you accursed, when Allah has already named it “The Holy Land” and bequeathed it to the Children of Israel until the Day of Judgment. There is no such thing as ‘Palestine’ in the Koran. Your demand for the Land of Israel is a falsehood and it constitutes an attack on the Koran, on the Jews and their land. Therefore you won’t succeed, and Allah will fail you and humiliate you, because Allah is the one who will protect them (i.e. the Jews).”

The sheikh added: “The Palestinians are the killers of children, the elderly and women. They attack the Jews and then they use those (children, the elderly and women) as human shields and hide behind them, without mercy for their children as if they weren’t their own children, in order to tell the public opinion that the Jews intended to kill them. This is exactly what I saw with my own two eyes in the 70’s, when they attacked the Jordanian army, which sheltered and protected them. Instead of thanking it (the Jordanian army), they brought their children forward to (face) the Jordanian army, in order to make the world believe that the army kills their children. This is their habit and custom, their viciousness, their having hearts of stones towards their children, and their lying to public opinion, in order to get its support.”

It is worth mentioning, that the above mentioned sheikh visited Israel and met Jewish religious scholars. The “Israel in Arabic” site conducted an interview with him, in which he said that the reason for his openness towards the Jewish people “comes from my acknowledgment of their sovereignty on their land and my belief in the Koran, which told us and emphasized this in many places, like His (Allah’s) saying ”Oh People (i.e the Children of Israel), enter the Holy Land which Allah has assigned unto you” (Koran, Sura 5 - “The Sura of the Table”, Verse 21), and His saying “We made the Children of Israel the inheritors (of the land)” (Koran, Sura 26 - “The Sura of the Poets”, Verse 59) and many other verses.

He (Adwan) added: “(The Jews) are peaceful people who love peace, who are not hostile and are not aggressors, but if they are attacked, they defend themselves while causing as little damage to the attackers as possible. It is an honor for them that Allah has chosen them over the worlds - meaning over the people and the Jinns until the Day of Judgment. I made the reasons for Allah’s choice clear in my books and pamphlets. When Allah chose them, He didn’t do so out of politeness, and He wasn’t unjust other peoples, it is just that they (the Jews) deserved this.”

http://israelbehindthenews.com/bin/content.cgi?ID=7491&q=1

[Asia 2,491]

Yesterday I watched this documentary:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QGguGU74BI&feature=share

Really interesting.

[OriZ 3,157]

Cool, some more brainwashing material. I'll reply to it a little later when I have time.

[Asia 2,491]

Brainwashing?

Aren't there double standards when it comes to Israeli and Palestinians accused of the same thing (throwing stones)?

Doesn't the army come for the children in the middle of the night, take them to unknown locations where they are questioned?

Aren't there (even!) the 5 year olds arrested and accused of terrorism? 5 year olds? Really?

Have you watched it at all?

Edited August 25, 2014 by Asia

[OriZ 3,157]

First two out of many more to come - in this first one the comments section which I am not pasting is also worth checking out:

The Australia/Israel and Jewish Affairs Council is currently researching and compiling a detailed critique of all the elements of the controversial ABC Four Corners documentary “Stone Cold Justice”, made with John Lyons of the Australian, and aired last Monday (Feb.10).

We hope this will be available shortly. In the meantime, here are three examples of obviously inadequate fact-checking or failure to provide proper context in the documentary and the parallel article in the Australian by John Lyons last Saturday (Feb.8). Sadly, they seem to be typical of a larger pattern in a documentary that appears to have been much more about sensationalist point scoring than about the careful weighing of evidence or fair and balanced journalism.

“Keeping Palestinian Children in Cages”

Both Four Corners and Lyons in the Australian alleged that children were kept in outdoor cages. On February 8 in the Australian, John Lyons wrote:

Similarly in the ABC Four Corners report Lyons said, “Last month, under pressure from human rights groups, Israel stopped a longstanding practice of keeping children overnight in outdoor cages. Children had been kept freezing in the cages during snowstorms.” In the context of the story, it was clearly implied that the children in question were Palestinian children.

“Last month the Israeli government, under pressure from human rights groups, stopped a practice of keeping Palestinian children in outdoor cages at night. The office of Justice Minister Tzipi Livni confirmed the decision and said it came after Ms Livni became aware that it had been a longstanding practice and had included keeping Palestinian children in the cages during snowstorms.”

Detailed research by CAMERA (Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America) about reports of supposed use of “cages”, “False charge of ‘Palestinian Kids in Cages’ Lives On in Australian Documentary”, reveals that this is a significant misrepresentation of the issue. The problematic practice being referred to, since ordered halted, involved Israeli prisoners being left in outdoor pens at a “transit point” for up to two hours during early morning transfers to court hearings. It affected all prisoners, meaning primarily Israeli citizens. While there are no specific demographic figures of who was involved, there is no clear evidence that either Palestinians or minors were involved, though it is is possible some were. In addition, the holding pens in question are in Ramle, near Tel Aviv. No snow fell there during Israel’s recent winter storms or any other time in recent memory. .

Similar claims to the ones made by Lyons about this practice led to corrections from at least two newspapers.

The British organistion CIF Watch published a report criticising the Independent for publishing an article about Israel supposedly keeping “Palestinian children in cages” for being factually inaccurate. The Independent has since issued the following clarification:

More recently Haaretz published two corrections concerning similar claims, includingupdating an article regarding the ABC Four Corners documentary itself, to note:

“After original publication of its report, the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel released an amended version, acknowledging that the information from the Public Defender’s Office about child prisoners being kept in cages did not refer specifically to Palestinians. We have amended our report accordingly and wish to make the position clear.”

This whole distortion appears to have started with a Jerusalem Post report on December 31 based on inaccurate information from the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel (as mentioned by the Independent in its correction), as CAMERA points out:

“This article was amended to reflect the fact that the now-halted practice of holding detainees in outdoor cages involved Israeli citizens and not necessarily Palestinians.”

According to CAMERA, Israel’s Justice Ministry confirmed that the practice in question affected primarily Israelis, not Palestinians. Spokeswoman Ganit Ben-Moshe reportedly wrote:

“The media charges began with a news article on Dec. 31 in the Jerusalem Post, ‘Livni halts practice of placing detained Palestinian children in outdoor cages.’ The story cited an NGO, The Public Committee Against Torture in Israel (PCATI), to allege that there was a ‘longstanding’ Israeli policy of torturing Palestinian children by caging them outdoors. The following day, a London-based newspaper, The Independent, published a similar article entitled ‘Israel government tortures Palestinian children by keeping them in cages, human rights group says.’ Two subsequent Ha’aretz articles also mentioned the Israeli practice allegedly targeting Palestinian children.

PCATI, the original source of the false allegations, wrongly conflated the holding of Israeli detainees in outdoor prison cells (referred to as ‘cages’) with general accusations of ill-treatment targeting Palestinians. Referring to “caging” as an example of the alleged torture of Palestinian children, the NGO linked to an earlier Hebrew-language statement from the Office of the Public Defender, which in turn was based on interviews with Israeli detainees at a prison transit facility. (There was no mention here of any Palestinians.) Those detainees reported being held temporarily in outdoor cells during severe weather as they awaited transfer to their court hearings. The Public Defender’s Office gave the report to Justice Minister Tzipi Livni, who contacted the Minister of Public Security and the commissioner of the Israel Prison Service. The practice, which had been in place for several months, was immediately stopped. From the start, this was a domestic issue related to conduct by the prison system toward Israeli detainees of whatever background that was distorted into an allegation of torture and abuse targeting Palestinian children.”

In addition, Israel’s Prison Service also repudiated the claims and according to CAMERA said:

“This is about [facilities in] territory within the State of Israel and about detainees who were Israeli residents and citizens – not specifically minors and not specifically Palestinians, as was claimed in various publications…

In response to your further request by telephone, we wish again to clarify that the report deals with an inspection done within Israeli territory regarding detainees who were brought to court hearings from different detention facilities in the [geographic area] of the center. There is no data base to ascertain the identity and citizenship of each and every one of the detainees, but it is absolutely clear that the conditions described apply to all detainees brought to that place, Jews and Arabs, minors and adults.”

Therefore, the claims by the ABC Four Corners program and Lyons suggesting that the ‘cages’ were just for Palestinian children are wrong, and actually led to corrections in other media outlets well – including, in the case of the Independent, one made well before Four Corners went to air or the Australian stories were published. The ABC and Australian should be correcting their claims as well.

It is illegal to arrest minors under the age of 12

“It is important to point out that the holding cells that were discussed serve as a transition point between prisons, or between prisons and the courts and therefore serve the entire prisoner population without any distinction as to their residency status (Israel/Palestinian Authority) or the type of offense (security/criminal), and mainly applied to criminal convicts. The length of time in which the prisoners were kept at the location was short, and no longer than two hours. All the complainants mentioned in the report in question were criminal prisoners/detainees who are Israeli residents. Similarly, we would like to point out that following the report, the use of the location was immediately discontinued and it was renovated and adapted.”

According to the Israeli army, minors under the age of 12 are not criminally responsible for their actions and therefore cannot be arrested or placed on trial – something the documentary never mentioned, while often implying the opposite. The Four Corners episode suggested that a nine-year-old boy Karim Dar Ayyoub was arrested by the IDF. The ABC transcript states:

However, even according to a Palestinian source, “Electronic Intifada”, this is incorrect. They say that Karim was 11 and he was not arrested but merely detained for questioning for two hours:

“JOHN LYONS: Later, police come for Islam’s nine-year-old brother, Karim.

(Police arresting Karim and putting him in a van)

GABY LASKY: He was nine-years-old I think when he was first arrested, Karim, which is completely unacceptable, even to the army authorities.”

“A month later, Islam’s younger brother eleven year old Kareem was chased down and hauled off by the Israeli police where he was illegally interrogated for two hours before getting released.”

(Incidentally, the link goes to a YouTube video which also says Kareem was 11.)

The Four Corners episode also prominently featured emotive footage of a five year-old boy Wa’adi Maswada who was detained by the IDF for allegedly throwing stones.

The story said:

What this fails to make clear is that according to the IDF, the child was never arrested and never touched by soldiers. He was not arrested, he was taken home. His father did not “intervene”, the soldiers were waiting at his home for him to return to discuss the problem with him and turn the issue over to Palestinian authorities. It is true the father was blindfolded and handcuffed after he refused to cooperate – and the IDF has admitted this was inappropriate and unjustified.

“On the streets of Hebron five-year-old Wadi’a Mawadeh was picked up by soldiers. An Israeli settler had claimed that he had thrown a stone at him….

The boy is taken by six soldiers. He was released after two hours.

One settler, making one allegation, is able to activate this level of military intervention against a five-year-old.

When his father intervenes, he is blindfolded.”

In a letter to B’Tselem published on Haaretz, Israel’s legal adviser Col. Ben Barak wrote:

However, Barak conceded that in this case the IDF acted inappropriately by blindfolding the boy’s father. Haaretz reported that Barak,

“In situations where IDF soldiers see children performing dangerous actions, such as hurling stones at passing vehicles, it would be totally irresponsible on the part of these soldiers to ignore what is happening and to allow the children to persist in their actions without any interference and to continue with their hazardous behavior… removal of the hazard through the distancing of the children from the area and through their immediate transfer to their parents’ custody or, alternatively, to the care of the Palestinian authorities, so that they can continue the treatment process as they see fit, is legitimate, as would be similar measures undertaken to deal with a minor involved in such activities in Israel.”

While it is clear that the IDF did not handle the incident well in certain respects, especially in its treatment of the father, otherwise, their behaviour seems not terribly dissmiliar to what police would do in Australia if they witnessed a small child throwing stones at cars – stop him or her, take him or her home, and speak to the child and his or her parents about the problem, possibly at a police station or other government agency.

“notes that the soldiers erred in detaining the father, whom they handcuffed and whose eyes they covered ‘before the two were released to the custody of the Palestinian police and in the absence of any suspicion justifying the above measures.’… Ben Barak emphasizes in his letter that Maj. Gen. Alon wanted ‘to make it crystal clear to his soldiers that the above actions were unworthy, especially since the child was very young and especially since the father had already been found.’”

But even more telling was the fact that Four Corners accepted it as a fact that the only source of the rock-throwing allegation was a settler, using this to make an emotive point about how “One settler, making one allegation, is able to activate this level of military intervention against a 5 year-old.” However, the IDF insists Mawadeh was “caught in the act” of stone-throwing by the soldiers, releasing a statement saying:

Even B’Tselem, the human rights organisation that filmed and publicised the incident appears to have conceded that it was the case that the boy “threw a stone” and, as far as AIJAC can tell, has never alleged that the intervention against Mawadeh was occasioned only by a complaint from a settler.

“On Tuesday afternoon a minor was caught in the act of hurling rocks toward a public street in Hebron and, by doing so, endangering passers-by in the area. IDF soldiers intervened on the spot and accompanied the minor to his parents.”

In other words, Four Corners decided to take the word of the 5-year-old and his family that there was no rock-throwing and the whole incident was occasioned by a settler, and either made no effort to ascertain the Israeli account of what happened or ignored it if they were aware of it. This allowed them to make a point about the “power” of settlers over Palestinian children which otherwise would make no sense.

Sadly, this is typical of most of this documentary. In all three incidents, ascertaining all the facts and getting both sides appeared much less important than scoring emotive points by presenting the most dramatic and sensationalist version of events possible. AIJAC will have much more on this unfortunate aspect of the program in coming days.

http://www.jwire.com.au/news/three-telling-factual-problems-with-4corners-stone-cold-justice-writes-tzvi-fleischer/40429

Evil and deeply untrue

By Greg Sheridan, The Australian
March 01, 2014

We are living in a time of infamous lies against the state of Israel and the Jewish people. We are witnessing, even in Australia, a recrudescence of some of the oldest types of anti-Semitism. One of the worst recent examples of anti-Israel propaganda that led directly to anti-Semitic outbursts was the Four Corners episode Stone Cold Justice, purporting to be about treatment of Palestinian children in the West Bank.

The program featured as a guest reporter John Lyons, of this newspaper. I have the greatest respect for John. He has produced some outstanding journalism in his time. In the article he wrote for this newspaper on February 8, he made some of the same allegations that were made on Four Corners. I found the allegations at best unproved and generally unconvincing.

However, the Four Corners program was a disgrace, a crude piece of anti-Israel propaganda that revived some of the oldest anti-Semitic tropes. In the year 2014, are we really going to allege again, on the basis of the flimsiest non-evidence you could imagine, that Jewish soldiers systematically physically crucify innocent children? Is there a school of anti-Semitism 101 operating out there? Do you not think that before you would air an allegation like that, if you had any real sense of editorial responsibility, you would be 100 per cent sure that it was true; you would track down the people alleged to have done it and get their testimony? The Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council has produced exhaustive rebuttals of virtually all the allegations in this program and I recommend readers visit the AIJAC website. The whole program was full of uncorroborated and intensely unlikely allegations.

You could make the same kind of film about Australia if you didn’t find it necessary to prove any of your facts. In the Four Corners program, the only Jewish settler interviewed was a religious extremist who said Palestinians must never have a state of their own and that God gave all the land to the Jews and that was it.

Yet the overwhelming majority of the Israeli population favours a two state solution. If you had even one ounce of responsibility in the way you treated these issues, and given their explosive, emotive nature, don’t you think some of that context might have been relevant? Isn’t there an obligation to convey the reality of the diversity of Jewish settlers in the West Bank?

An Israeli border policeman preparing a tear gas launcher to fire gas canisters at the boys protesting outside the Kedumim settlement

A week or two after the Four Corners program went to air, I attended a Catholic mass in a suburban church. The priest was preaching about forgiveness. Most examples he chose were taken from the news. One, he took from the Middle East. It concerned a heroic Palestinian whose family had been killed by Israel, but who still had the moral grandeur to forgive the Israelis. The priest said nothing else about the Middle East. So of all the malevolence and genuine evil in the Middle East, the only example the priest thought worth mentioning was a generic Israeli crime.

With 2000 years of Christian anti-Semitism behind him, the priest had no hesitation in presenting Israel as the killer of innocent families and the only question in the Middle East being one of the moral greatness of the Palestinians in forgiving the Israelis.

So this is what we’ve come to in 2014. The national broadcaster tells us that Jewish soldiers crucify innocent children and Christian clerics routinely portray Israel as the murderous oppressor of the Middle East. But these stereotypes are both evil, and deeply untrue. Over many trips to Israel, and many visits to neighbouring Middle East countries, I have come to the conclusion Israel has the best human rights and democratic institutions and civil society of any nation in the greater Middle East. More than that, I have tried hard to make my own investigations into two questions. Does the Israeli army routinely behave unreasonably? And what is the truth about the settlements?

Israel is not perfect. Like every nation it makes mistakes, including moral mistakes. Undoubtedly, some of its soldiers have engaged in abuses. But over the years I have interviewed dozens, perhaps hundreds, of Israeli soldiers and former soldiers, many active on the Left of Israeli politics and harshly critical of their government. I have also interviewed many Palestinians. My net judgment is Israel’s army behaves with as much consideration for human rights and due process as any modern Western army – US, Australian or European – would do in similar circumstances.

Then there is the question of Jewish settlements in the West Bank. Israel took control of the West Bank because it was attacked by Jordan in a war Israel fought for its very existence. Almost no one internationally had recognised Jordanian sovereignty over the West Bank and the land there is to be negotiated. The overwhelming consensus in Israel is that the vast majority of the West Bank, perhaps 95 per cent, will go to a Palestinian state with compensating land swaps from Israel proper. A few clusters of Jewish settlements will be retained by Israel.

Bob Carr, who I think was a very good foreign minister, recently argued all the settlements are illegal. Foreign Minister Julie Bishop disagrees. On this, Bishop is right and Carr wrong. The problem with discussion of the settlements is that it is so unsophisticated and typically lumps so many different communities together. If all settlements are illegal, that means the Jewish presence at the Wailing Wall in the old city of Jerusalem, access to which was denied to Jews when it was under Arab control, is illegal. It means that the historic Jewish quarter of the old city is also illegal. It means that every Jewish household anywhere in East Jerusalem is illegal.

It is worth noting, by the way, that Palestinians who live in East Jerusalem qualify for Israeli identity cards that allow them to live anywhere in Israel. Increasing numbers are buying apartments in West Jerusalem. But if all settlements are illegal then it is apparently illegal for Israelis, be they Jewish, Muslim or Christian, to buy in East Jerusalem.

I have spent many days visiting the settlements to try to find out what the people who live there are like. As foreign minister, Kevin Rudd told me the settlements occupied about 3 per cent of the West Bank. Since 2004, settlements have not been allowed to expand beyond existing borders. Very, very few settlers are like the sole woman interviewed on Four Corners. There are a lot of very orthodox Jews who live in settlements, but the ultra-orthodox do not serve in the Israeli army and are often not very nationalist at all. They live in settlements because it is cheap and they want to have their own neighbourhoods with very orthodox schools, cooking facilities, etc.

Palestinian children walk warily past settlers’ outposts to go to schoool. Attacks on them are so frequent that many have an army escort. From Stone Cold Justice

But most of the people I met in big, mainstream settlements like Gush Etzion and Maale Audumin, which are very close to Israel proper, were moderate, national religious types. The Jewish connection to the land historically certainly meant something to them, but they tended to vote for mainstream centre-right parties and live peaceably enough with their Palestinian neighbours. (Indeed, some 25,000 Palestinians work on settlements.) These settlers don’t make for very exciting TV interviews because they are so reasonable and unremarkable.

An Israeli friend put it to me that perhaps 50 per cent of settlers are basically non-ideological, and lived in settlements because they can get a house much more cheaply than in Israel proper. Maybe 30 per cent to 40 per cent are moderate orthodox or national religious, mainstream, attached to the land, patriotic, pretty pragmatic. Perhaps 10 per cent (of settlers, not of Israelis overall) are intensely ideological and believe all the land should stay with the Jews. And perhaps 1 per cent or less are genuinely extremist and some of them genuinely violent. That certainly accords with what I have observed over years of visits.

There are also outposts or settlements in the West Bank that are illegal under Israeli law. All serious Israeli negotiations involve the principle of repatriating a significant number of settlers back to Israel proper or to settlements Israel is definitely going to keep. Typically, the number of such postulated returns varies from 50,000 to 90,000.

Aspects of Israel’s settlement policy have been very ill-advised. But I know that settlements are not the main obstacle to peace. The main obstacle to peace is that most of the Arab world will not accept the idea that Israel as a Jewish state has a right to exist and live in peace and security. The Four Corners program did nothing to enlighten the debate and led to a shocking outburst of rank anti-Semitism on ABC websites.

I really thought we were beyond that

http://jfjfp.com/?p=57458

[Asia 2,491]

First two out of many more to come - in this first one the comments section which I am not pasting is also worth checking out:

Thank you for using copy+paste operation and sharing some way too long paragraphs...

If I wanted to read a novel, I'd go to the library or I'd buy a book.

Thanks.

Could you not bother with "many more to come", please?

Thanks.

[Karee 4,189]

“It is important to point out that the holding cells that were discussed serve as a transition point between prisons, or between prisons and the courts and therefore serve the entire prisoner population without any distinction as to their residency status (Israel/Palestinian Authority) or the type of offense (security/criminal), and mainly applied to criminal convicts.

What's the difference between a security offense and a criminal offense? I'm guessing that in one case you go through a legal process and in the other they just lock you up without trial for as long as they want. Like I said, just a guess.

[Karee 4,189]

Thank you for using copy+paste operation and sharing some way too long paragraphs...

If I wanted to read a novel, I'd go to the library or I'd buy a book.

Thanks.

Could you not bother with "many more to come", please?

Thanks.

It is odd these copy pasted 8 page propaganda pieces from Oriz.

[OriZ 3,157]

Why waste my time writing it myself? You posted a bogus video, I'll post many, many, answers to it. Lets keep going.

In advance of an Australian Broadcasting Corporation program to be aired on February 10, The Australian’s John Lyons has produced two articles and an accompanying video interview on the subject of Israel’s treatment of Palestinian children in the West Bank.

The Australian articles most likely offer a preview as to what will be seen on the television.

To our Australian readers – please tune in on February 10, 8.30pm to Four Corners on ABC1 and see whether this topic is handled fairly and appropriately.

Central to Lyons’ report is the following:

At the heart of the issue is that Israel enforces two legal systems in the West Bank, one for Jews and one for Palestinians. About 2.5 million Palestinians live under Israeli occupation in the West Bank – also known as the Palestinian Territories – which Israel has occupied since 1967.

Palestinian children appear before the military court, while Jewish children face a civil court with full legal protections.

Contrary to Lyons’ statement, the two legal systems in operation are divided between Israeli citizens (which, of course, includes both Jews and Arabs) and non-citizens. This is not a division based on race, ethnicity or religion but on the legal status of the disputed territories. The reason why Palestinians, both children and adults, are not subject to Israeli civil law is that Israel has never annexed the West Bank and therefore, Israeli law does not apply to the area. Instead, military law is applied.

It’s safe to say that Lyons would not advocate Israel’s annexation of the West Bank and it’s also safe to assume that were Israeli law to be administered in the disputed territories, there would be an international outcry and accusations of breaching so-called international law.

So it’s hardly surprising that Jewish children face a civil court. After all, how many Jewish children would find themselves in front of a military court charged with throwing rocks and Molotov cocktails at Israeli cars or IDF soldiers?

In addition, Lyons’ statement that “2.5 million Palestinians live under Israeli occupation,” needs clarification, especially when discussing the legal rights of the Palestinians. Some 2.4 million Palestinians live under Palestinian Authority rule and are subject to the PA’s domestic laws.

To Lyons’ credit, he interviews Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesperson Yigal Palmor who refutes the charge that Israeli policy is designed to make life intolerable for the Palestinians:

Let me say this very clearly. There is no such policy. A policy to create fear? There is no such thing. The only policy is to maintain law and order, that’s all. If there’s no violence, there’s no law enforcement.

But who exactly are the Palestinian “children” that Lyons refers to? These aren’t 8 year olds but Palestinian youths, perhaps 17 years old who are engaged in the same terror activities as Palestinians who are legally considered to be adults. Israel does not arbitrarily arrest minors for the sake of it. It isn’t “only” stone throwing that Palestinian minors are involved in.

In response to a Guardian article on the same subject, the spokesperson for the Israeli Embassy in London wrote in January 2012:

But you omit the horrific nature of the atrocities that minors, some as young as 12, can be arrested for.

Hakim Awad, 17, is a minor. Last March [2011] he and his 18-year-old cousin, Amjad, brutally murdered the Fogel family while they slept. No mercy was shown to three-month-old Hadas, her two brothers (aged four and 11) and their parents. The scene of the crime, including the severed head of a toddler, left even the most experienced of police officers devastated. The duo proudly confessed to their killings, and they have shown no subsequent remorse.

Between 2000-04, 292 minors took part in terrorist activities. Shocking images of Palestinian infants dressed in explosive vests are only the tip of the hate industry that Palestinian children are exposed to. Ismail Tsabaj, 12, Azi Mostafa, 13, and Yousuf Basam, 14, were sent by Hamas on a mission chillingly similar to the one involving the Fogels, aiming to penetrate a Jewish home at night and slaughter a family in their beds. In this case, the IDF fortunately stopped them in time. …

In the face of ever younger minors committing ever greater numbers of crimes, its efforts to maintain and even increase legal protections are impressive. When a minor involved in terrorist activity is arrested, the law is clear: no torture or humiliation is permitted, nor is solitary confinement in order to induce a confession. …

Furthermore, a special juvenile court has been established to guarantee professional care for minors in detention. The above and other measures have succeeded in making legal proceedings easier for minors, and have almost halved their duration. …

It would be our wish that no minor would ever find themselves in Israeli custody. Unfortunately, we have to deal with the reality, not our dreams.

Much criticism is made of Israeli arrest operations of children in the middle of the night. Lyons may wish to consider the probable outcome of an arrest operation carried out during daylight hours. This would most likely result in violence as Palestinians in the immediate vicinity engage IDF soldiers leading to injuries or worse on both sides. Is the arrest of children during nighttime hours unpleasant? Certainly. But it still preferable to the alternative.

Lyons also states in his video interview that the Israeli authorities have been very receptive to the criticisms of the treatment of Palestinian children. Israel recognizes that improvements need to be made to the system and are continuously striving for this.

The discussion is undoubtedly a sensitive and emotive one. Nonetheless, it should be carried out in an accurate manner that avoids demonizing Israel.

http://honestreporting.com/rock-solid-reporting-down-under/

• AIJAC's Dr. Colin Rubenstein's letter to the Australian on 17 April 2013, "Minors in Palestine" which stated:

"THE article by Middle East correspondent John Lyons is an example of Israel being damned if it does and damned if it doesn't ("UN circle of unaccountability", 13-14/4).

"It implies the existence of a conspiracy whereby Israel has subverted the UN Children's Fund because UNICEF's report on Palestinian minors in military detention didn't correspond with the tone of moral outrage that has sometimes characterised Lyons's reporting. The report is the first to be issued by UNICEF since it began formally co-operating with Israel -- and positive results of this can be seen in changes in Israeli policy that the report describes.

"Rather than acknowledging these developments, Lyons attacks UNICEF for co-operating with Israel.What is being overlooked are the improvements Israel is making as it tries to handle Palestinian youth who are intent on perpetrating violence, often encouraged by their elders and the Palestinian media.

"The situation is difficult, and there is room for improvement, but it is worth keeping two things in mind. First, it is international law, not discrimination, that requires Israel to treat Palestinian minors in the occupied West Bank in accordance with the legal system in place there. Second, stone-throwing frequently results in severe injury.

"To give one example, an Israeli toddler, Adele Biton, is still in hospital after being critically injured when her family car crashed after being hit by a stone thrown on March 14. Her mother and two older sisters were also injured. Five Palestinians have been arrested over the attack, all of them minors."

• Maurice Ostroff's article "Second thoughts on the UNICEF report on Israel" in the Jerusalem Post in April 2013, also criticised Lyons' reports regarding Israel and UNICEF, and compared Israel with how other advanced countries deal with law-breaking minors.
• Gerald Steinberg of NGO Monitor "Child soliders of Hamas not the sole victims of a conflict clouded by propaganda" in the Australian in December 2011.
• A UNICEF progress report from October 2013 noted Israel is making progress to date, it states:

"In response to the release of the UNICEF paper, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Israel stated it would study the conclusions and work to implement them through on-going cooperation with UNICEF. The Military Advocate General (MAG) has designated the ‘Military Prosecutor for Judea and Samaria' (West Bank) as the focal point for dialogue on this issue with UNICEF.

"Since the publication of the UNICEF paper, the Military Prosecutor has been engaging closely with UNICEF and has been reviewing the recommendations of the UNICEF paper. This engagement is facilitating a deeper analysis and understanding of the process of military arrest, detention and prosecution in the West Bank."

[decocker 7,198]

Thank you for using copy+paste operation and sharing some way too long paragraphs...

If I wanted to read a novel, I'd go to the library or I'd buy a book.

Thanks.

Could you not bother with "many more to come", please?

Thanks.

rule one for posting in a thread alongside oriz. any documentary, article, video, that is not completely cheering on israel and justifying their every move, is propaganda and false per oriz. if you dare suggest that israel is not righteous - expect to be hit with a wall of text.

keep it up and you'll get called a jew hater.

[OriZ 3,157]

In the long history of terrorism in the Middle East conflict, Palestinian children have tragically been exploited by groups such as Hamas for a wide range of attacks against Israeli civilians - including in suicide bombings and other terrorist attacks which have taken many innocent lives.

On March 11 this year, Khakim Awad and Amjad Awad murdered five members of the Fogel family, including three children. At least one killer was a minor. More frequently, Palestinian children often rain down heavy rocks on Israeli cars - often fatally.

Unfortunately, in the article headlined "Stone cold justice" (The Weekend Australian Magazine, November 26) on the efforts by the Israeli courts to deal with the very difficult problem posed by Palestinian "child terrorists", these basic facts are erased. Instead, it repeats the highly distorted image of Palestinians as victims and relies primarily on organisations and individuals who have invested heavily in promoting this political campaign. For example, officials from Defence for Children International - Palestine Section, a noble-sounding name that masks its real activities as a powerful propaganda organisation, provided many of the claims in the article. DCI-PS's agenda is primarily political, and its emphasis on children is a means towards this objective.

In many of their activities, the leaders of this organisation distort history beyond recognition, such as by erasing the history of Arab attacks. The 1948 war (known as the Nakba in Arabic), in which many Israeli children and others were killed, is twisted by DCI-PS to fulfil its political agenda. According to the organisation's version, Israel has "historical and legal responsibility for the Nakba" and its consequences, even though the war was initiated by the invasion of Israel by five of its neighbours.

In more recent examples, DCI-PS propagandists erase tens of thousands of rockets launched at Israeli towns such as Sderot (each such attack is a war crime), instead declaring that Israeli efforts to protect civilians from attack are "illegal acts of aggression". After the Gaza war in early 2009, DCI-PS published a list of innocent Palestinian

children it claimed had been killed by Israel, and disregarded evidence showing that 17-year-olds Ibrahim Mostafa Fraih Sa'id and Ibrahim Abed al-Rahim Rajab Suliman, among others, were clearly involved in the Hamas attacks.

The DCI-PS claims further misrepresent the situation by failing to address the gravity of these crimes. In September of this year, Asher and Yonatan Palmer were murdered in a terror attack near Hebron. Asher lost control of the car after a rock smashed the windshield, killing him and his one-year-old son.

Systematic reports from the Israel Defence Forces detail "160 severe cases implicating minors . . . stone and rock throwing as well as bomb throwing that have caused death" in recent years.

Court documents in 2008 reveal attacks on individuals such as Revital Ben Haim and Lipaz Rotter, who each sustained major injuries after their vehicles were struck by stones.

Israel's court system is sensitive to the age of these perpetrators. In both the cases mentioned above, judges issued reduced sentences to the minors involved in these attacks because of their age.

The tragedy of Palestinian children who are taken advantage of by groups such as Hamas and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine for attacks, their Israeli child victims, and the resulting moral dilemmas faced by Israeli courts are important topics for discussion. Any analysis should examine ways in which minors are used by militants and politicised NGOs such as DCI-PS as pawns.

Attempts to minimise or erase the severity of these crimes works against an enduring solution, and perpetuates the exploitation of Palestinian youth, as well as adding to the toll on Israeli children.

http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article/child_soldiers_of_hamas_not_the_sole_victims_of_a_conflict_clouded_by_propaganda

[OriZ 3,157]

In a comment provided to the Australian Jewish News on the issue, AIJAC's Executive Director Dr Colin Rubenstein said:

"While AIJAC, together with others, awaits additional clarifications from the Israeli authorities on the details of some of the allegations made in the Lyons story in The Australian- and concern by Australians for the welfare of children is understandable and commendable- the reported call for Australian diplomatic interventions by Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd is somewhat confusing. For example, as Israeli Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Yigal Palmor has already explained, Israel is obliged under international law to apply to the West Bank the legal system that was in place before it became occupied in 1967, so it is therefore neither surprising, nor a cause for outside international concern, that the rules for minors accused of offenses there are different to those in Israel proper.

Furthermore, much of the attention devoted to this whole issue seems to be driven by the NGO, Defence of Children International (Palestine), which, it seems clear, has an anti-Israel political agenda and is employing ostensible concerns about children primarily as a means to that end. We hope the Foreign Minister will also call for an investigation into the other side of the problem of Palestinian minors accused of violent acts - the exploitation and indoctrination of children by both Palestinian terror groups and by the Palestinian Authority official education system and media. This is the root cause of the acts that sees Palestinian minors jailed, and Israeli civilians, including children, injured or killed. Furthermore, we would hope that any investigation should ensure that none of the considerable Australian aid assistance to both the Palestinian Authority and Palestinian NGOs is contributing to this indoctrination or exploitation of Palestinian children."

In an attempt to shed some light on the facts, AIJAC has prepared this background document below which includes material provided by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Israeli Defence Forces.

An analysis of Israel's legal process regarding Palestinian minors accused of using stones as weapons in the West Bank *

This document looks at the Israeli legal process regarding Palestinian minors in the West Bank (hereinafter, the "Area") accused of using stones as weapons, including a specific analysis of a recent two month period, August and September 2011.

1. The laws in Israel and the laws in the Area

Under international law in general, and Article 43 of the

Fourth Hague Convention respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land

and its annex:

Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land

, 18 October 1907, in particular, there is no duty that the legal system governing the Area, under belligerent occupation, mirror that of the occupying power. In fact, the opposite is true, changes to the existing legal regime are specifically limited. Thus, it is appropriate and even natural that the legal systems should be different and independent.

Despite this, the State of Israel invests significant time and resources to improve all aspects of minors' interactions with the law enforcement system. These conditions remain subject to the disparate and exceptional circumstances which exist in the Area.

2. The ideology of hate and stone throwing

Despite the changes in military legislation in the past few years, a number of dilemmas remain for Israel, given the specific nature of offenses that tend to take place in the Area. Unlike criminal trends of juveniles in most societies, many crimes carried out by minors in the Area are of a violent, ideological nature and pose a clear and imminent threat to the public. In fact, over 70% of charges against minors in the military courts are charges of a violent nature.

The prominence of ideological motives as the basis of criminal activities in general and juvenile crimes specifically is a common phenomenon. A recent notable case involving a minor perpetrating a crime out of ideological hatred was the massacre of the five members of the Fogel family, including a three-month-old infant and two young children, committed by 17-year-old Hakim Awad and his accomplice. Regretfully, this case is not unique, and other minors have perpetrated several suicide bombings resulting in the deaths of dozens of victims.

These crimes reflect a complex reality of hatred, violence and criminal activity often carried out by minors. 82% of all the indictments in August and September 2011 involved disruption of public order or terrorist actions - offenses that are ideologically motivated. 16 cases brought before the Military Prosecutor in August and September 2011 included alleged terrorist activity, including five cases of attempted murders.

At the same time, there has been a reduction in cases involving potentially-lethal offences such as murder and terrorist activity. In 2009 and 2010, the court tried 145 and 138 charges, respectively, involving potentially lethal crimes, whereas in 2011 only 18 such charges were pleaded before the court.

That is certainly a positive trend on all sides.

Another dilemma faced by Israel is that as opposed to most societies in which parents and family members are perceived as the key to the rehabilitation of minors, family members of Palestinian juvenile offenders who commit ideologically-based violence against Israeli civilians or soldiers, sometimes tend to encourage such behavior on ideological grounds.

There have been some shocking cases where parents use their minor children to assist in carrying out terror attacks. A recent case that was brought before the Court focused on a minor that assisted his father to facilitate the execution of a terror attack in which a British tourist was murdered in February 2011

(4697/11 (Judea) Military Attorney v Razek Habin Ali Kawasama)

.

Additionally, there are unique operational difficulties in the Area. Security forces often have limited access and significant dangers exist for security officials, which impact the manner in which arrests are carried out in Palestinian cities. Options such as house arrests are not readily available, nor are suspects generally responsive to court summons. Finally, the reality of limited cooperation of potential witnesses and defendants and the need to protect the lives of human sources of intelligence may occasionally prolong arrest periods or the duration of a proceeding.

Despite the unique dilemmas in the dealing with minor suspects in the Area, Israel makes significant efforts to provide for just and fair treatment of minors throughout the entire military legal process in accordance with international standards. Israel continually reviews its military criminal justice system for minors and will continue to analyze the overall trends and specific cases within its system to balance out various interests and to match, as much as possible, the standards of both Israeli domestic laws and of other military legal systems.

3. Age of minors

Of the 51 indictments submitted by the Military Prosecutor in August and September 2011, only one involved a 13-year-old child; 7 cases involved 14-year-olds; and 5 cases involved 15-year-olds; while the remaining 38 cases were submitted against defendants 16 and 17 years of age.

4. Stone throwing offences

Throwing of stones (which includes small rocks) is an offense that can have lethal outcomes. An unfortunate example of the lethal potential of stone-throwing is the recent murder of Asher Palmer and his infant son, Jonathan, on 23 September 2011. This murder was caused by a stone thrown at their car. The case in this matter is currently pending before a military court,

5347/11 (Judea) Military Prosecutor v. Ali Abed Alhadi Ismail Saada

.

Clearly, stone throwing constitutes an offence with significant potential damage. Stone throwing is often carried out by young minors and is a legally complicated offence due to the availability of the weapon, the simplicity of its use and the often easy escape from the scene of the crime. Proving the identity of a suspect is also often difficult, as the offence tends to be carried out from within large crowds.

In 2011, 222 cases of stone throwers were brought before the military court. Out of the 51 cases brought to the Military Prosecutor in August and September 2011, 21 cases involved throwing of objects and stones by minors (10 of these cases were by minors under the age of 16). In 13 cases, objects were thrown at transportation routes endangering motor vehicles. In six of those cases, the suspects were charged with causing actual damage to vehicles.

5. Arrest of minors

a. Duration of initial detention:

The duration of the initial detention of a minor under the age of 16 is determined by the Military Prosecutor or by his deputy. If the prosecution decides to issue an indictment, it is to be issued as early as possible and preferably within the initial period of detention.

In August and September 2011, the police received prior approval for initial arrest in every case requiring approval of the Military Prosecutor.

b. Time before being brought before a judge:

While legally, the Military Prosecutor has significant discretion regarding the time before a minor appears before a judge, in the majority of cases this period does not exceed 24-48 hours. Out of the 12 cases in which minors under 16 were arrested under the Military Prosecutor approval in August and September 2011; seven minors were brought before a judge within 24 hours; three minors were brought before a judge within 48 hours; and two minors (who were arrested on Thursday nights and had to wait for the courts to open on Sunday morning) were brought before a judge within 72 hours.

c. Issuing of an indictment:

The average time for the Military Prosecutor to issue an indictment in August and September 2011 was seven days from the moment of initial arrest.

6. Investigations of minors

a. Video and audio recordings: Investigations of minors are carried out in the Arabic language. The vast majority of investigations are recorded, most by video and others by audio recording. Out of the 51 cases brought to the Military Prosecutor in August and September 2011, in 48 of these cases either a video or audio recording of the investigation or a written record in Arabic was maintained. Of the remaining three cases, two suspects were released without the issuance of an indictment, and in a third case the recording suffered technical problems.

b. Presence of an attorney during the investigation, detention hearings and primary criminal proceedings: Both Israeli law and the military legal system require the investigator to inform a suspect prior to the investigation of the right to consult with an attorney in a language understood by the suspect. During August and September 2011, all minor suspects had legal representation in legal proceedings before the courts.

7. Proceedings in Military Courts

a. Military Court Judges:

Military Court judges are independent, impartial and professional. The military courts are not a part of the IDF hierarchy, but rather represent the State of Israel's judicial authority inside the military. Military courts tend to be consistent in their judgments and committed to basic legal principles such as the rights owed to defendants and to minors in particular.

b. Duration of proceedings:

The Military Court has conducted an in-depth analysis of the average duration of minor cases in the years 2007-2011 from indictment to the conclusion of proceedings. It found a 44% reduction in the average duration of proceedings that were closed in the observed period. In 2007, the average duration of proceedings was 167 days. A significant reduction took place when the Juvenile Military Court was established between 2008 (165 days) to 2009 (121 days). Over time, additional reductions in average duration of proceedings have been observed, to 105 days in 2010 and only 92.5 days in 2011. Of course, despite the Court's efforts to speed up proceedings, in some cases defense attorneys have acted to delay hearings prior to agreeing to plea arrangements or other agreed resolutions.

c. Juvenile Military Court:

Established on 29 July 2009 to protect the rights of minor defendants and guarantee adequate professional care for minor detainees, this court considers their welfare and best interests. In practice, the Court has applied new rules and practices regarding minors to all suspects under the age of 18, in accordance with the internationally accepted age of minority.

d. Arrest and Release Procedures:

While minors are brought before general military courts for arrest and release procedures, it should be noted that the same practice, of bringing minors to general courts rather than juvenile courts for these specific proceedings, is upheld in Israel as well.

e. Convictions: The Military Court Judges consider the specific circumstances of every minor and use their full discretion in sentencing. A comparatively low percentage of convictions in indictments may be of interest in this context. In 2009, only 62.8% of charges ended in convictions, in 2010, 57.3%, and in 2011, 58.62%.

8. Imprisonment sentences

a. Sentences calling for the incarceration of minors under the age of 14 are rare. In such cases, the duration of the penalty is significantly lower than the maximum sentence of the crime as established under the law.

b. Recent years have witnessed a significant decrease in the imprisonment of minors. While during 2009 and 2010, 539 and 522 minors, respectively, were imprisoned, in 2011 only 315 minors are expected to be imprisoned (this data reflects the extrapolations of the cases closed by 31 August, 2011).

c. The duration of sentences has also shortened significantly. While in 2009 and 2010 the average prison sentence was for 316 and 295 days respectfully, in 2011 the average sentence has been reduced to 181 days (through 31 August).

9. Amendment 10 to the Security Order (Judea and Samaria), 5771-2011

Recently approved Amendment 10 raised the age of minority in the Area to 18, meeting the standards of both international practice and Israeli law. The Amendment provides all minors under the age of 18 with the following rights:

a. A court-appointed defense attorney;

b. The presence of a parent or relative during every hearing;

c. The separation of minors and adults in living quarters in all detention facilities;

d. The separation of minors and adults in all judicial proceedings;

e. The transfer of all cases involving minors from the General Military Court to the Juvenile Court, and re-initiation of proceedings;

f. The notification of a parent about any investigation;

g. The right to be informed of one's rights prior to an investigation;

h. The issuance of a probation officer report prior to sentencing;

i. A statute of limitations of one year for offences committed by minors.

http://www.aijac.org.au/news/article/don-t-throw-stones

[OriZ 3,157]

So near, and yet so far

On Fairfax's "Daily Life" site (April 23) Ruby Hamad, who has previously penned some ill-informed and one-sided pieces on Israel, presented a sober account of the escalating restrictions imposed by Hamas on Gazans.

Unfortunately her explanation for Gaza's economic difficulties was entirely predictable: "This relentless politicisation of Islam is a cruel blow to the people of Gaza who have struggled under an Israeli sea, land and air blockade for more than six years. Israeli sanctions have limited Gaza's access to medical, food and building supplies. The United Nations, which has frequently criticised the blockade, refers to Gaza as ‘an open air prison', and has repeatedly warned of a dire humanitarian crisis."

But there are two pink elephants unacknowledged by Hamad. The reason for the limited blockade was Hamas' unreconstructed commitment to destroy Israel and its refusal to renounce violence, demonstrated by the ten thousand plus rockets fired from Gaza at Israeli civilian targets.

Second, Hamad doesn't mention that Gaza shares a land border with Egypt - now run by its Muslim Brotherhood allies.

Besides which, there has never been a humanitarian crisis in Gaza, something UN officials have acknowledged. Israel always ensured that adequate food and medicines entered Gaza. Until recently, Israel supplied Gaza with most of its electricity. Indeed, a lengthy energy crisis in Gaza in 2012 was caused by Hamas' refusal to pay Egypt market rates.

The CIA World Factbook exposes the lie that situation in Gaza is "dire", with a life expectancy of 74 years - higher than in neighbouring Egypt and way above the world average of 67 years.

Occasionally these truths will out. In April 2011, Mathilde Redmatn, the deputy director of the Red Cross in the Gaza Strip admitted: "There is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza. If you go to the supermarket, there are products. There are restaurants and a nice beach."

Or take this June 2011 Reuters story where Mahmoud Daher, the Gaza office director of the World Health Organisation, explained that shortages of medicines resulted from "a failure by the Palestinian authorities to pay suppliers on time and a lack of cooperation between health authorities in the West Bank and Gaza."

Justified fears

Charles Richardson in Crikey (April 16) wrote that Israel does not want Iran to gain nuclear weapons because they would act as a "deterrent...against future Israeli action".

Sorry, but Israel does not fancy a regime that not only calls for its destruction but funds and trains Hamas and Hezbollah to possess the kind of weapon that could actually make this nightmare a reality.

As even the former so-called moderate Iranian president Ali Rafsanjani explained it in December 2001, "the use of even one nuclear bomb inside Israel will destroy everything. However, it will only harm the Islamic world."

Furthermore, as Wikileaks showed, fear of a nuclear weapons equipped Iran is not the preserve of only Israel and the US. Most of the Middle East's Arab leaders are frantically worried and preparing to develop their own deterrent, threatening a regional nuclear arms race.

Shalom Salam

An Australian (April 16) editorial linked the resignation of internationally respected Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad with the Palestinian Authority's "folly" in pursuing an upgrade of its status at the UN last November:

The US, EU and Israel felt confident doing business with him... Mr Fayyad has quit, undone by political intrigue that has cynically used the dire state of the Palestinian economy to undermine him. The economic mess is not Mr Fayyad's fault, however; it is largely the consequence of the UN's overwhelming vote in favour of recognising Palestinian statehood, an outcome Mr Abbas was warned about. Israel, as it said it would, has been refusing to give the PA the $100 million a month it collects for it in taxes. The US has cut back aid. Mr Fayyad was unenthusiastic about the UN bid. He warned that it was a symbolic gesture that would bring risks with no benefit... As prime minister, his was a voice of reason and common sense. No wonder the Hamas terrorist thugs in Gaza are celebrating his removal. He was a bulwark against their extremism and ambitions. Mr Fayyad's resignation is a big blow to prospects for resumed negotiations. It is a pity more countries, including Australia, didn't foresee the consequences and do more to block Mr Abbas at the UN.

Meanwhile, a silly Canberra Times (April 15) headline reported Fayyad's decision as "Palestinian resignation blow to US", suggesting that his exit would have greater significance for US interests than Palestinian - at best, a highly debatable contention.

Justice done

A report in the Age/Canberra Times/Sydney Morning Herald (April 16) on the findings of Israel's Military Advocate General's Corps investigation into civilian Palestinian deaths in Gaza caused by the Israel Defence Forces operations during last November's eight day second Gaza War noted that "in most cases, it said the deaths were the result of unintended damage, operational errors or mistaken identities."

Unfortunately, the original LA Times report, which itself omitted some vital context, such as the fact that Israel had to contend with Hamas fighters firing from within civilian areas, was edited for Fairfax readers.

For example, the included fact that "the Israeli report also exonerated its military in the Nov. 14 killing of an 11-month-old Gaza baby and two adult relatives" had an omitted follow up sentence noting that "the U.N. Office of High Commissioner for Human Rights said the three Gazans were probably killed by an errant Palestinian rocket that fell short of Israel."

Sadly, Fairfax papers also did not cover the April 11 Human Rights Watch statement that Hamas had "not even begun a promised investigation more than four months after gunmen killed seven Palestinian prisoners accused of collaboration with Israel."

In what looks like a bit of a trend, Fairfax readers would need to consult the personal Twitter account of its Middle East correspondent Ruth Pollard to learn this.

Conspiracy-land

Five weeks after the Australian's John Lyons (April 13) reported on a UNICEF critique of Israel's military detention policies when dealing with Palestinian minors, Lyons revisited the topic to advance a bizarre claim.

Offering little in the way of evidence, Lyons wrote that "an investigation...suggested that UNICEF had caved in to pressure from Israel or self-censored" because "while UNICEF found Israel had engaged in actions that fitted its definition of torture, the report avoided using that word in its findings."

In other words, because a UN report had failed to incorporate Lyons' preferred terminology there must be some kind of a conspiracy!

Furthermore, Lyons seemed affronted that UNICEF "praised Israel for its dialogue about the system under which Palestinian children from the age of 12 are tried by Israeli soldiers" and implemented some of its recommendations. Isn't that the point of a (probably highly expensive) report?

It appears that Lyons is determined to find fault with any improvements Israel makes as it tries to juggle respecting human rights with addressing the potentially life-threatening activities of Palestinian youth who are not only intent on perpetrating violence but are often encouraged to do so by their leaders, media, and education system.

Unfortunately, this side of the equation rarely, if ever, seems to perturb Lyons.

For example, Lyons did not report on Israeli toddler Adele Biton who is still in hospital after being critically injured when her family's car crashed after being hit by a stone thrown by Palestinians on March 14. Her mother and two older sisters, ages 4 and 5, were also injured. Five Palestinian minors were arrested over the attack.

Howe's that

Herald Sun columnist Alan Howe (April 13) nominated envy as the catalyst for many of the world's international conflicts, particularly the hostility directed towards Israel from its neighbours and North Korea's ongoing belligerence towards its southern counterpart:

Next month, it will be 65 years since Israel was declared a state by David Ben-Gurion. Things weren't promising for the fledgling nation surrounded by hostile neighbours: it had almost no natural resources, inadequate water and little arable land. Its founders probably knew from the outset the wars would come...These days, grumpy neighbours still battle with the concept of Israel's existence. While Israelis - among them more than 1.5 million voting Arabs, the world's luckiest and most liberated - have built their cities, turned granite into green with imaginative dry-land farming, and cherished education as the best way to advance their country, their resentful neighbours have looked on not in wonder, but in anger. It's envy. While Israel has developed one of the world's most advanced economies, its GDP has grown to $32,351. That's the same as South Korea. The Palestinian equivalent is $1924. That's the same as North Korea. If I lived in North Korea, I'd pray for change. If I lived in Palestine, I'd vote for it. If I wanted it.

http://www.aijac.org.au/news/article/media-week-so-near-and-yet-so-far-justified-fear

Readers of the Australian media will recall several instances of reports highlighting NGO claims that Israel engages in "torture" of Palestinian prisoners. What they will not likely have heard is that there are far more credible allegations of torture on a large scale against Palestinian security forces in both the West Bank and Gaza. Moreover, the worst of the cases on the Palestinian side appear to be genuine torture as most people would understand it - which is not necessarily the case with many of the Israeli cases alleged.

The Independent Commission for Human Rights (ICHR) - a body set up by the Palestinian Authority (PA) - has alleged 28 cases of torture or ill-treatment in PA prisons in the West Bank in the month of April alone - plus another 23 cases against the Hamas security forces in Gaza. In March, the body recorded 22 allegations concerning torture in the West Bank and 32 in Gaza.

Unfortunately, the ICHR does not publish details about most of these alleged cases, making it impossible to tell how serious the allegations of "torture and ill-treatment" it lists are.

However, we do know about one particularly serious case - that of Mohamed Abdel Karim Dar of Hebron. According to the ICHR, Dar was hospitalised after he "lost the ability to speak and suffered from wounds to his body as a result of banging his head against the wall and tying his hands while being held in solitary confinement." What happened to him sounds like real torture in anyone's interpretation.

The same is not necessarily true for many of the allegations made by NGOs against Israel, and often given extensive media coverage. For example, perhaps the most extreme and bizarre example of allegations against Israel in recent months was a rambling conspiracy theory piece by John Lyons, the Middle East correspondent for the Australian, on April 13, in which he excoriated the UN agency UNICEF for its recent report on Israeli treatment of Palestinian children. His bizarre thesis was that UNICEF "had caved in to pressure from Israel" and he was particularly incensed that "UNICEF found Israel had engaged in actions that fitted its definition of torture, [but] the report avoided using that word in its findings."

In reality, UNICEF actually uncovered little that would constitute "torture" as the ordinary punter would understand it - or indeed, as it is defined in international treaties. Torture according to the United Nations Convention Against Torture is when agents of the state engage in "Any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person."

UNICEF certainly alleged some significant abuses by Israeli authorities - the most serious of which was an allegation that in a few cases some Palestinian minors had been "beaten, slapped and kicked" by Israeli soldiers after being arrested. This is an allegation that certainly deserves investigation and if true, punishment - though it is always worth recalling that in the heat of the Arab-Israel conflict, not all allegations made by supposed victims are necessarily true. In any case, such violence would certainly be illegal in Israel. Meanwhile, UNICEF has praised Israel for taking seriously its concerns and trying to address them.

However, while these allegations represent behaviour which is deplorable and illegal, if true, it is not clear, without further information, if they arise to the level of torture as defined by the UN convention - that is the infliction of "severe pain and suffering."

Furthermore, most of the rest of allegations in the report simply do not offer even a prima facie case for torture as defined by the UN treaty. They involve issues such as making threats to force confessions, the use of temporary solitary confinement, blindfolds, arrests in the middle of the night, and failure to allow toilet use by detainees for a few hours. While it is certainly possible to criticise these practices, if the allegations are true, and even to allege some of them are illegal, calling them "torture" risks degrading and cheapening the term.

What has happened is a common pattern in international institutions and NGOs - reasonable restriction agreed by states are "re-interpreted" expansively by over-zealous bureaucrats and activists. For example, since a person could theoretically be tortured by extended periods of sensory deprivation, any use of a blindfold for any period becomes, according to these interpretations, ipso facto "torture".

Meanwhile, regardless of this whole debate about what is torture, how much do you want to bet that if an Israeli body alleged that it had documented upwards of 50 cases of "torture" a month by Israeli security forces, there would be major headlines in the Australian and international media?

"El Sionismo" in Venezuela

The AIR has covered previously how the Venezuelan regime of the late Hugo Chavez was known for its persecution of the dwindling Venezuelan Jewish community and for frequent enunciation of antisemitic conspiracy theories by officials and in the pro-government media.

After the death of Hugo Chavez in early March, and a close and disputed election of Chavez's chosen successor Nicolas Maduro, Venezuela's remaining 8,000 Jews were doubtless hoping for improvement.

But early signs are not promising. The major news in Venezuela of recent weeks has been the release by an opposition party of an audio tape of a conversation allegedly between Mario Silva, a prominent television anchor and incorrigible chavista, and a senior official from Cuba's secret police. The tape - in which Silva reports on the situation in Venezuela to the Cuban - is seen by many Venezuelans as evidence that the Chavez/Maduro regime is subservient to Havana. It also features Silva apparently agreeing with a comment from Fidel Castro calling for an end to elections in Venezuela.

Silva responded to the release of the recording by claiming he had been set-up. And who did he blame for setting him up? El Sionismo - "Zionism."

http://www.aijac.org.au/news/article/scribblings-tortured-logic

[OriZ 3,157]

AIJAC is appalled by the intellectually weak and fundamentally misleading collaboration between the ABC and the Australian, “Stone Cold Justice”, which aired on the February 10 edition of “4Corners”. National Chairman of The Australia/Israel and Jewish Affairs Council Mark Leibler , said:The basic claim in this unbalanced and misleading quasi-documentary is that Israel has a new policy of deliberately targetting Palestinian children for judicial abuse and to intimidate them into acting against

Mark Leibler

their own friends and families. Viewers were expected to abandon critical faculties and accept that every word spoken by Palestinians was true, despite a long documented history of Palestinian distortions and fabrications against Israel, and every counter claim by Israelis should be dismissed. The background on interviewees was insufficient if even presented. Gratuitous references to alleged Biblical promises or political machinations were included in a manner which seemed designed to incite prejudice and contempt.

Typical of the lack of basic integrity were references to Israel’s sudden West Bank presence in 1967, without reference to what happened before that year, why things changed and what has happened since, and the omission of the fact that more than 95% of the Palestinian population live under Palestinian, not direct Israeli, administration.

Most tellingly, the relentless incitement in Palestinian society, including from their government, which fills children with such hatred of Israel, and the recruitment that sees them throwing rocks at soldiers and civilians, or taking part in terror attacks, the parents who either direct children to attack Israelis or, at best, do nothing to prevent them doing so, was completely unmentioned.

There are undoubtedly areas where Israel needs to improve, and Israel has acknowledged that this is one of them,and indeed UNICEF’s praise for Israel in its October report last year for reviewing its tactics, was only cryptically mentioned by “4Corners”.

In short, Australians have the right to expect that our national broadcaster will attempt to reasonably present all the facts and context of a situation, and present an unbiased,dispassionate account, rather than the blanket demonisation we saw here.

http://www.jwire.com.au/news/stone-cold-justice-aijac-has-its-say/40379

[OriZ 3,157]

...The UNICEF recommendation was based on the fact that minors are taken to police stations for interrogations, and if the family does not know a lawyer, or if that particular lawyer is not then available, the minors would not have representation at the interrogation since there is no public defender in Judea and Samaria. The Israeli authorities were enthusiastic about the UNICEF recommendation, and drew up a form in which lawyers and representatives of the aforementioned NGO’s could provide details about lawyers, their contact information, their geographic location, their area of practice, their fee information, and more. “They saw the form. They heard we are willing to take action,” the official said of Lasky, the NGOs and the other lawyers present. “It is six months later, and guess how many, including from the NGOs who attack on the subject, guess how many have given the names of lawyers? Zero.”

Tamar Sternthal..

CAMERA Middle East Issues..

16 February '14..

"Simply fictitious," responded a senior Israel Defense Forces official when asked about allegations leveled in a Feb. 10, 2014 Australia Broadcasting Corporation "Four Corners" report concerning brutal torture of Palestinian children during interrogations.

In contravention of journalistic codes of ethics, reporter John Lyons never gave Israeli officials the opportunity to respond specifically to the alleged instances of extreme abuse described. CAMERA, therefore, checked with Israeli authorities, reaching a high-level official intimately knowledgeable about the minors interviewed in the "Stone Cold Justice" broadcast.

One of them, Fathi Mahfouz, who was arrested on April 10, 2013 at the age of 15, and held for 82 days, claimed on camera that during his interrogation he had been hung from a cross-like structure for hours and beaten, and had been subjected to hitting and electric batons.

Another child, Qsai Zamara, alleged that his 18-day nightmare at the age of 14 included an interrogation in which he was whipped with a hose and threatened with electrocution.

About these two children, the IDF official stressed that they had never made these claims in court. Mahfouz appeared in court one day after his April 10 arrest, and he returned to court again on April 14 when he entered into a plea bargain, confessing to the crime for which he had been indicted, which was throwing rocks at military vehicles and personnel from a distance of 15 meters during a wide scale demonstration. During these two appearances, he never raised any allegations of being suspended from a cross or being beaten. "The only claim [of abuse] he made in court was on the 14th that the border policeman who arrested him in some way injured him and the court ordered that a protocol of a hearing be sent to the internal affairs office of the police, part of the Justice Ministry, for investigation."

"Never once did he make a claim regarding his interrogation at any stage," added the official, who confirmed that Mahfouz was represented by a lawyer in court.

Similarly, Zamara never voiced claims of torture during his court appearances. He was arrested on April 22, 2013, and brought to court the following day for a remand hearing in which he was represented by a lawyer. Three pages of arguments were made on the April 23 hearing, and "never once does he mention the terrible torture he [later said he] was subjected to." On April 25, he again appeared in court when his indictment was filed. Any alleged torture that took place during interrogations would have happened in this window of time, and yet "never once had Zamara claimed that he had been so viciously attacked or tortured."

"It's unbelievable that now, 10 months afterwards, he's making these amazing claims of what happened to him," stated the incredulous official.

Official: Lyons Heaps on ‘Lies’

The army official called Lyons’ portrayal of the court system “fictitious, blatant and malicious.” “Lyons' broadcast focused only on the initial stage of arrest and interrogations and ignored entirely the court system,” he stated. “Judges send complaints of abuse to the relevant authorities. He ignored the fact that some minors, including [interviewee] Islam Dar Ayyoub, were released on bail. He ignored the fact that the prosecution is required to hand over all evidence to the defense."

Standing in front of the walls of the Ofer military prison near Ramallah, Lyons had reported:

I’ve been behind these walls three times. I saw children shuffling across the courtyard, handcuffed and shackled. Some hearings lasted 60 seconds. I saw one boy shout the name of his prison so his mother would know where he was being held. I saw the judge convict some children without even once looking at them. Through it all, what I saw was a conveyor belt of convicted children.

Accusing Lyons of gross falsehoods, the source emphatically stated that John Lyons had never been inside the towering walls of the Ofer prison. “No journalists go there,” said the source, noting that Lyons had been to the courtrooms outside the prison walls.

Regarding Lyons’ claim that a boy shouted the name of his prison so his mother would know where he was being held, the official said that was “simply a lie.” Before interrogations, the authorities are required to notify parents of minors where their child is being held and that he is about to be interrogated, he said.

As for the allegation that some hearings lasted 60 seconds, the IDF man noted that some hearings are strictly technical, such as scheduling the next hearing. The official accuses the reporter of deliberately painting a false picture. The claim that the court system is a conveyor belt “is so far from the truth that it’s unbelievable,” he said.

The IDF source likewise countered Lyons claim that “Typically, a Palestinian boy convicted of throwing stones will be sentenced to about three months imprisonment.” Because “there is a tremendous spectrum of severity within the offense of stone-throwing,” it is impossible to make a generalization about sentencing for stone-throwing,” the IDF official stated. “Generalizations like that are very, very simplistic,” he added, noting that the sentence depends on a range of factors such as distance from the target, whether the target was civilian or military, vehicle or a person, whether the stone-throwing was part of a mass demonstration or not, and more.

Finally, regarding Lyons, an IDF source told CAMERA that army representatives took the Australian reporter to film mass rioting in the West Bank Palestinian village of Qadum. The footage of that stone-throwing, however, never made it into “Stone Cold Justice.”

Has Horton Represented a Palestinian Child?

Besides the interviewed minors, one of the main sources for Lyons' story is Gerard Horton. Lyons introduces Horton as follows:

Onto this frontline has walked Australian lawyer Gerard Horton. He left his practice as a commercial law barrister in Sydney six years ago and is now leading a campaign to end a system under which Palestinian children have fewer rights than Israeli children – including being subjected to night-time arrests by heavily armed soldiers.

The IDF official charged that Horton, with his professional background in commercial law, is not at all knowledgeable about the legal system which he so loudly criticizes. Moreover, said the Israeli, despite all of his years of involvement in cases involving Palestinian minors, not once has he or any of his colleagues seen Horton representing a Palestinian child.

In the broadcast, Horton claims:

So take a situation involving two children in the West Bank throwing stones, one a Palestinian child, one an Israeli child living in the settlements. The Palestinian child will be prosecuted in a military jurisdiction with far fewer rights and protections, whereas his Israeli counterpart, living some 500 meters away, will be prosecuted in a juvenile system which meets international standards and complies, is a sort of system you would expect in any Westernized democracy.

The law permits an Israeli child on either side of the Green Line to be arrested overnight, just as a Palestinian child. In practice, though, Palestinian minors are arrested overnight while Israeli children are not because arrests of Palestinian children during the day have resulted in mass riots and violent attacks against security forces.

In addition, "the rules of evidentiary admissibility in military courts are the same as the rules of evidentiary admissibility in Israeli civilian courts," emphasized the army officials. "Statements taken under duress are not admissible as evidence."

Beatings and other abuses are immediate cause for not allowing evidence, said the army man. "Gerard Horton doesn't know it and if he knows it he doesn't choose to say it."

Moreover, noted the army official, by law convictions may never be based solely on the confession of the defendant.

The official charged that Horton is "travelling the world spreading ignorance, propaganda and lies. He is using the idea that he is a tremendous defender of human rights, but he has zero understanding."

As an example, the IDF noted Horton’s use of a misleading and meaningless figure. Horton had said, “I think perhaps to give you some indication of how efficient, from a military perspective, this system is, according to the military courts’ own records, their annual report, the courts have a conviction rate of around 99.74 percent.”

Most judicial systems do not use statistics for conviction rates because one defendant can be charged for more than a dozen counts, and be subsequently acquitted for various counts, while convicted of others, said the IDF official. He noted that in the years 2008 to 2010, the military court had a higher acquittal rate than civilian courts in Israel. “By using these numbers, Horton is simply expressing his own ignorance of any knowledge about how to assess what goes on in criminal courts,” averred the Israeli. “He never mentions the acquittals.”

In addition, the IDF source said that in 2013, that out of the 465 indictments involving Palestinian minors, one-third had the statements written in Arabic. Every other statement which was written in Hebrew was accompanied by an audio recording, or an audio-visual recording. "Gerard Horton does not know that this is common practice," said the source. "All of the evidence in the hands of the prosecution is sent over to the defense."

Claims of Coerced Confession Rejected

Another minor interviewed in “Stone Cold Justice,” identified as Islam Dar Ayyoub (his full name is Islam Dar Ayyoub al-Tamimi), alleged that his confession, at the age of 14, had been obtained under duress. He states:

He told me, "Here, sign this paper." I told him, "It's in Hebrew and I can't read Hebrew. Can you read it to me?" He said, ‘"It's for your release. You need to sign it." After I signed it at the court. I was surprised to find out it was a confession paper."

In the context of Islam's case, Lyons interviews Gaby Lasky, whom he identifies only as an "Israeli lawyer." She states:

I can see a pattern that Israel hasn't been able to put down the non-violent movement in the occupied territories through violent means. So the best way to do that is by incriminating those leaders, and the easiest way to do that, to achieve, to get those incriminations is by arresting children which are the weakest link.

The IDF official charges that Gaby Lasky is an "interested party," and that John Lyons deceived viewers by not mentioning that she represented Islam in court. Lyons "never mentioned that she raised claims in court objecting to the admissibility of his confession. These claims [regarding a confession obtained under duress] had already been rejected," he noted.

"Once the duress claim is made a trial process takes place to ascertain whether the confession was made freely or under duress," the source said. "The trial process took place with Islam and the claim was rejected." In the trial process that takes place once a claim of duress is voiced, the judge halts the proceedings and holds a side hearing about the admissibility of the evidence, calling witnesses for the prosecution and the defense.

‘Step up, Gaby Lasky’

Recalling an incident from last year, the Israeli authority charged that Lasky is “simply there to attack us, not to do anything to help the welfare of the child.” He described a meeting between Israeli officials, lawyers and representatives of NGOs such as B’Tselem, Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) and Breaking the Silence, to follow up on a UNICEF recommendation that all children in detention should have prompt access to the lawyer of their choice. The UNICEF recommendation was based on the fact that minors are taken to police stations for interrogations, and if the family does not know a lawyer, or if that particular lawyer is not then available, the minors would not have representation at the interrogation since there is no public defender in Judea and Samaria.

The Israeli authorities were enthusiastic about the UNICEF recommendation, and drew up a form in which lawyers and representatives of the aforementioned NGO’s could provide details about lawyers, their contact information, their geographic location, their area of practice, their fee information, and more. “They saw the form. They heard we are willing to take action,” the official said of Lasky, the NGOs and the other lawyers present. “It is six months later, and guess how many, including from the NGOs who attack on the subject, guess how many have given the names of lawyers? Zero.”

Lasky is a vocal critic of the courts system. As she stated on the “Four Corners” broadcast, “We’re not talking about courts of justice; we are talking about courts of occupation.”

“Where is Gaby Lasky?” the IDF official challenged since she too never filled in the table to assist Palestinian minors. “Step up. Help the children.”

Lasky and the others are “not going to do that because it’s not in their interest,” he averred. “They understand that were they to cooperate there would be less reason to attack us,” he concluded, blaming their “political, anti-Israel, anti-IDF motive.”

http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com/2014/02/lies-gross-falsehoods-and-stone-cold.html