9 oct 2017
Israeli soldiers arrest a Palestinian man during a raid on the West Bank city of Hebron, September 20, 2017
As Israelis, as Jews, as human beings, we must confront the daily reality that takes place throughout the occupied territories. And in doing so, we must face ourselves.
As we began building our sukkot, the Yom Kippur reading from the Book of Jonah echoed in my head: “How can you be sleeping so soundly!” (Jonah 1:6). As though I myself heard the captain crying out, over the roar of the raging storm to the prophet fleeing his mission, as he hid away, asleep, below deck.
Other moments in the story flash through my mind, as though in fast-forward: how Jonah was thrown into the stormy sea and found himself “in the fish’s belly three days and three nights” (Jonah 2:1); how after he had agreed to his mission and went to the city of Nineveh to rebuke the people, he was surprised to see that “the people of Nineveh believed God. They proclaimed a fast, and great and small alike put on sackcloth” (Jonah 3:5); how the prophet refused to accept God’s mercy on the people of Nineveh and “begged for death, saying, ‘I would rather die than live’” (Jonah 4:8); and finally, how change came only at the last moment, after the Lord had rebuked him: “You cared about the plant, which you did not work for and which you did not grow, which appeared overnight and perished overnight. And should not I care about Nineveh, that great city!” (Jonah 4:10-11).
Perhaps only then did he finally see how blind he’d been, and finally understood his purpose and the true meaning of being a prophet.
Three years ago, I was still spending Yom Kippur in uniform. I served as a soldier in the Civil Administration — the military body that is entrusted with controlling and monitoring the Palestinian population in the occupied territories. I was part of a huge bureaucratic apparatus and saw how us soldiers frequently presented orders and enforced rule. I learned with time about the vast spectrum of everyday arbitrary actions that are concealed behind the headlines that have long since become familiar to us.
For example, I learned how we prevented dozens of Palestinian farmers from harvesting their olive trees because of their proximity to Israeli settlements. Or alternatively, a conversation that the brigadier general held with soldiers about the sacred concept of “proportionality” in order to reemphasize the open-fire regulations after Palestinians were shot by mistake. I knew that the lives of hundreds of thousands under our full control were always subject to “security needs,” and I did not truly understand my role in all of it, what it was that I had done.
It is not the extraordinary events that now come to my mind, but rather the day-to-day ones. I remember the conversation I had in the operations room the morning after we imposed a closure on a village of about 3,000 Palestinians. While this closure was the answer to a Molotov cocktail thrown the previous night at an Israeli car, it meant the soldier at the checkpoint had a question: whether or not to let a couple and their ill son pass through to reach a clinic in the next village. To me, the answer was a clear yes, since this was exactly what we meant when we used the term “humanitarian cases,” which could enable us to allow movement even under closure. But the approval of the regional commander was needed. The brigadier general emphasized that while it was permissible this one time, we must examine every case individually — that we should not consider this decision a set policy.
As Israelis, as Jews, as human beings, we must confront the daily reality that takes place throughout the occupied territories. And in doing so, we must face ourselves.
As we began building our sukkot, the Yom Kippur reading from the Book of Jonah echoed in my head: “How can you be sleeping so soundly!” (Jonah 1:6). As though I myself heard the captain crying out, over the roar of the raging storm to the prophet fleeing his mission, as he hid away, asleep, below deck.
Other moments in the story flash through my mind, as though in fast-forward: how Jonah was thrown into the stormy sea and found himself “in the fish’s belly three days and three nights” (Jonah 2:1); how after he had agreed to his mission and went to the city of Nineveh to rebuke the people, he was surprised to see that “the people of Nineveh believed God. They proclaimed a fast, and great and small alike put on sackcloth” (Jonah 3:5); how the prophet refused to accept God’s mercy on the people of Nineveh and “begged for death, saying, ‘I would rather die than live’” (Jonah 4:8); and finally, how change came only at the last moment, after the Lord had rebuked him: “You cared about the plant, which you did not work for and which you did not grow, which appeared overnight and perished overnight. And should not I care about Nineveh, that great city!” (Jonah 4:10-11).
Perhaps only then did he finally see how blind he’d been, and finally understood his purpose and the true meaning of being a prophet.
Three years ago, I was still spending Yom Kippur in uniform. I served as a soldier in the Civil Administration — the military body that is entrusted with controlling and monitoring the Palestinian population in the occupied territories. I was part of a huge bureaucratic apparatus and saw how us soldiers frequently presented orders and enforced rule. I learned with time about the vast spectrum of everyday arbitrary actions that are concealed behind the headlines that have long since become familiar to us.
For example, I learned how we prevented dozens of Palestinian farmers from harvesting their olive trees because of their proximity to Israeli settlements. Or alternatively, a conversation that the brigadier general held with soldiers about the sacred concept of “proportionality” in order to reemphasize the open-fire regulations after Palestinians were shot by mistake. I knew that the lives of hundreds of thousands under our full control were always subject to “security needs,” and I did not truly understand my role in all of it, what it was that I had done.
It is not the extraordinary events that now come to my mind, but rather the day-to-day ones. I remember the conversation I had in the operations room the morning after we imposed a closure on a village of about 3,000 Palestinians. While this closure was the answer to a Molotov cocktail thrown the previous night at an Israeli car, it meant the soldier at the checkpoint had a question: whether or not to let a couple and their ill son pass through to reach a clinic in the next village. To me, the answer was a clear yes, since this was exactly what we meant when we used the term “humanitarian cases,” which could enable us to allow movement even under closure. But the approval of the regional commander was needed. The brigadier general emphasized that while it was permissible this one time, we must examine every case individually — that we should not consider this decision a set policy.
A left-wing Israeli protester stands next to masked Israeli riot police at an anti-occupation demonstration in the West Bank, April 1, 2016
Our outward gaze comes so easily. We look at the “other,” at Nineveh, and we and judge his or her responsibility. We count sins so effortlessly. When I encountered cases of Jewish terrorism against Palestinians and their property, I knew how to identify clearly who were the perpetrators and who were their victims. When I processed complaints from Palestinians about violence from IDF soldiers, I could discern instantly who was in the wrong. It was much harder for me to identify my own responsibility, to understand that I was an active participant. It was much harder to grasp that no occupation can be moral, orderly, or enlightened. To discover that, indeed, the opposite is true. It is the very premise — that 18-year-old Israeli soldiers hold the power, through our laws and military orders, to administer the ‘civilian life’ of millions whose basic rights are denied — that is unacceptable.
In Professor Haviva Pedaya’s beautiful interpretation of Rabbi Israel Najara’s poem “I Will Go” (Ana Elech), she identifies Nineveh as “a focal point of evil, about which the alarm must be sounded, and which must be denied.” She defines the giant fish as a place that teaches Jonah “to be a man who does not refuse his mission.” She explains that Jonah’s mission was not to predict what was to come, and that the proof that he was a true prophet was not whether Nineveh would be destroyed and his vision realized. Rather, his role was to illustrate the choice between fleeing and fighting to change, to be “a messenger who brings the Word of God in order to rock the foundations and thereby create new possibilities.” This, according to Pedaya, is the essence of the Book of Jonah: the transformation of the heart from evil to righteous, from self-inflicted blindness to a willing gaze. The desire to be exposed, to expose and to become open to repent.
During the holiday of Sukkot, as the sukkah inspires us as a symbol of transience and uncertainty, we must not forget the decision of the Minister of Defense to impose an unusually long closure on the occupied territories by closing all the checkpoints between Israel and the West Bank. But the closure is not really imposed on the “territories”. It is imposed on the millions of Palestinian residents who live there, and on over 100,000 workers who are prevented from providing for their families. On the Eve of Sukkot, I read about this decision and thought about the shift between closure and repentance. Between denial of our role in this dark reality, and the possibility of rebirth, recognition, and choosing a different path.
I pray for us. I wish to remind God of the lesson he taught Jonah: see us, see the repentance we seek to create in this Land, and show mercy on Your creations.
Frima (Merphie) Bubis, 23, was raised in the religious-Zionist community, and today is the Jewish Diaspora coordinator for Breaking the Silence. This post was first published in Hebrew on Local Call. Read it here.
Before you go...
A lot of work goes into creating articles like the one you just read. And while we don’t do this for the money, even our model of non-profit, independent journalism has bills to pay.
+972 Magazine is owned by our bloggers and journalists, who are driven by passion and dedication to the causes we cover. But we still need to pay for editing, photography, translation, web design and servers, legal services, and more.
As an independent journalism outlet we aren’t beholden to any outside interests. In order to safeguard that independence voice, we are proud to count you, our readers, as our most important supporters. If each of our readers becomes a supporter of our work, +972 Magazine will remain a strong, independent, and sustainable force helping drive the discourse on Israel/Palestine in the right direction.
Our outward gaze comes so easily. We look at the “other,” at Nineveh, and we and judge his or her responsibility. We count sins so effortlessly. When I encountered cases of Jewish terrorism against Palestinians and their property, I knew how to identify clearly who were the perpetrators and who were their victims. When I processed complaints from Palestinians about violence from IDF soldiers, I could discern instantly who was in the wrong. It was much harder for me to identify my own responsibility, to understand that I was an active participant. It was much harder to grasp that no occupation can be moral, orderly, or enlightened. To discover that, indeed, the opposite is true. It is the very premise — that 18-year-old Israeli soldiers hold the power, through our laws and military orders, to administer the ‘civilian life’ of millions whose basic rights are denied — that is unacceptable.
In Professor Haviva Pedaya’s beautiful interpretation of Rabbi Israel Najara’s poem “I Will Go” (Ana Elech), she identifies Nineveh as “a focal point of evil, about which the alarm must be sounded, and which must be denied.” She defines the giant fish as a place that teaches Jonah “to be a man who does not refuse his mission.” She explains that Jonah’s mission was not to predict what was to come, and that the proof that he was a true prophet was not whether Nineveh would be destroyed and his vision realized. Rather, his role was to illustrate the choice between fleeing and fighting to change, to be “a messenger who brings the Word of God in order to rock the foundations and thereby create new possibilities.” This, according to Pedaya, is the essence of the Book of Jonah: the transformation of the heart from evil to righteous, from self-inflicted blindness to a willing gaze. The desire to be exposed, to expose and to become open to repent.
During the holiday of Sukkot, as the sukkah inspires us as a symbol of transience and uncertainty, we must not forget the decision of the Minister of Defense to impose an unusually long closure on the occupied territories by closing all the checkpoints between Israel and the West Bank. But the closure is not really imposed on the “territories”. It is imposed on the millions of Palestinian residents who live there, and on over 100,000 workers who are prevented from providing for their families. On the Eve of Sukkot, I read about this decision and thought about the shift between closure and repentance. Between denial of our role in this dark reality, and the possibility of rebirth, recognition, and choosing a different path.
I pray for us. I wish to remind God of the lesson he taught Jonah: see us, see the repentance we seek to create in this Land, and show mercy on Your creations.
Frima (Merphie) Bubis, 23, was raised in the religious-Zionist community, and today is the Jewish Diaspora coordinator for Breaking the Silence. This post was first published in Hebrew on Local Call. Read it here.
Before you go...
A lot of work goes into creating articles like the one you just read. And while we don’t do this for the money, even our model of non-profit, independent journalism has bills to pay.
+972 Magazine is owned by our bloggers and journalists, who are driven by passion and dedication to the causes we cover. But we still need to pay for editing, photography, translation, web design and servers, legal services, and more.
As an independent journalism outlet we aren’t beholden to any outside interests. In order to safeguard that independence voice, we are proud to count you, our readers, as our most important supporters. If each of our readers becomes a supporter of our work, +972 Magazine will remain a strong, independent, and sustainable force helping drive the discourse on Israel/Palestine in the right direction.
Israeli Internal Security Agency Shin Bet has the power to reject appointment or dismiss Arab teachers at Arab schools, Israeli Ynet News has reported.
According to Days of Palestine, a former official at the Israeli Ministry of Education, Emmanuel Koplovich, told Ynet News that Shin Bet has rejected the appointment of many qualified teachers.
“Shin Bet was involved in everything regarding recruitment for education positions,” confirmed the former head of the agency, Knesset member Yacob Berri. “It is still active in Arab schools to this day.”
The news website revealed that Shin Bet targeted the Arab teachers in cooperation with the ministry. Teachers did not know why they were dismissed or not accepted for a position.
It also revealed that some of the teachers were not involved in any political activities, but were rejected because of the political activities of one of their relatives.
According to the reports, information about Arab teachers and head teachers was circulated among different government institutions, mainly the education ministry and the Prime Minister’s office.
The Director of Adalah Centre for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, Hassan Jabareen, said that Shin Bet’s interference in the recruitment and dismissal of Arab teachers and head teachers has been known for a long time in the Arab community.
Such actions reiterates the hostility of the Israeli Education Ministry towards the country’s Arab citizens, who make up a fifth of the population.
“The Shin Bet has an important role,” insisted the former Director General of the Ministry of Education, Samson Shoshani. “Its mission is to make sure than no oppression is practiced against anyone.”
He added: “We are not against extremist teachers, but against extremist people in regard to loyalty to the state.”
According to Days of Palestine, a former official at the Israeli Ministry of Education, Emmanuel Koplovich, told Ynet News that Shin Bet has rejected the appointment of many qualified teachers.
“Shin Bet was involved in everything regarding recruitment for education positions,” confirmed the former head of the agency, Knesset member Yacob Berri. “It is still active in Arab schools to this day.”
The news website revealed that Shin Bet targeted the Arab teachers in cooperation with the ministry. Teachers did not know why they were dismissed or not accepted for a position.
It also revealed that some of the teachers were not involved in any political activities, but were rejected because of the political activities of one of their relatives.
According to the reports, information about Arab teachers and head teachers was circulated among different government institutions, mainly the education ministry and the Prime Minister’s office.
The Director of Adalah Centre for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, Hassan Jabareen, said that Shin Bet’s interference in the recruitment and dismissal of Arab teachers and head teachers has been known for a long time in the Arab community.
Such actions reiterates the hostility of the Israeli Education Ministry towards the country’s Arab citizens, who make up a fifth of the population.
“The Shin Bet has an important role,” insisted the former Director General of the Ministry of Education, Samson Shoshani. “Its mission is to make sure than no oppression is practiced against anyone.”
He added: “We are not against extremist teachers, but against extremist people in regard to loyalty to the state.”
7 oct 2017
According to economists' estimates, Israel has never had a sequence and a continuity in governmental corruption, as dangerous as it is now.
In a series published by the PIC, we shed light on the most prominent cases of corruption that affected the Israeli leaders, which included the political, security, religious and social sectors.
In the first episode, prepared by the Translation and Monitoring Department of the PIC, we review the cases of the corruption of the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his family, according to Haaretz.
The Bar-On-Hebron case 1997
In his first term, Netanyahu appointed Roni Bar-On as a legal advisor to appease Aryeh Deri, in exchange for Shas’s support for the Hebron agreement.
At the end of the 90-day intensive investigation, in which 60 witnesses were questioned, the prime minister and eight ministers were questioned by the police that recommended directing criminal charges against Netanyahu and those accused of forgery, breach of trust (Avigdor Lieberman for breach of trust, Deri of blackmailing and threats).
The police recommended that Netanyahu be tried on charges of forgery and breach of trust. Police said it involved mixing legitimate political moves with actions which amount to criminal activity, and separating them is not easy task.
Prosecutor Rubinstein ruled that no indictment should be filed for the lack of sufficient evidence, and after the prosecution’s recommendation of opening a criminal case, the Attorney General announced the closure of the case.
Amedi case 1999
Netanyahu and his wife Sarah have spent money from the state coffers for private jobs at their home, suspected of giving and receiving bribes, fraud and obstructing interrogation procedures. The prosecution recommended that they should be tried for fraud and breach of trust.
The case began in September 1999 after the publication of an investigation on charges of corruption by Mordechai Gelat by Yediot newspaper that Netanyahu and his wife tried to transfer funds from the Prime Minister's Office to contractor Avner Amedi in the period leading up to his election and during his tenure. Netanyahu objected and rejected the charge against him. The price seemed unreasonable to him, and the prosecution recommended closing the case by the attorney general.
Bibi Torres case
The State Comptroller Shapira found there was a possibility of criminal activity. It is not appropriate for the Foreign Minister to finance the trip of Netanyahu and his wife. The Attorney-General has stated that the case is deliberate, and there is no evidence in it, thus the Attorney General closed the case
The garden furniture case 2015
Netanyahu and his wife moved the prime minister's garden furniture to their own house. The police recommended that Sarah Netanyahu be prosecuted for fraud, and the case focused on a number of issues that gave rise to suspicion of criminal offenses, including suspected fraud, and breach of trust.
The case was transferred to the Jerusalem District Attorney's Office in April 2016. Since then, the case has been reinstated to resume the investigation and remains in the Fraud Investigation Unit. Netanyahu's office replied that the allegation of irregularities was unfounded. The prime minister ran many meetings in the garden corner of his home, whether in Jerusalem or Caesarea, and even if a new set of garden furniture was purchased for use in Caesarea during the prime minister's term, it will be in accordance with procedures approved by the Ministry of Justice.
The electrician issue 2015
Sarah Netanyahu used the electrician close to the family in violation of the procedures and conditions of exceptional use at the expense of the state, and it was recommended that the police sue Sarah for fraud, and focused on a number of issues that arose because of the suspicion of criminal offenses.
The State Comptroller General Shapira raised doubts in this case. For three months, Sara Netanyahu invited Avi Fahima to work at the Caesarea headquarters, both on weekends when the price was more expensive, and the case remained in the hands of the Police Investigations Unit.
The issue of meals 2015
Sarah Netanyahu asked for food for family and private events at the expense of the prime minister's office; Meni Naftali, former director of the prime minister's office, claimed that Netanyahu's wife had passed a false number of the invitees to pay a larger amount of money. Instead of saying four, she said the food would be given for 10.
The issue of nursing care provider 2015
Sara Netanyahu spent money on nursing care from the prime minister's budget and it was recommended that the police sue Sarah for forgery and breach of trust. The case is still in the police investigation unit.
The case of Arnaud Mimran 2016
French Jewish millionaire Arnaud Mimran was convicted of paying 170,000 euros to Netanyahu and his family. Netanyahu's response was that he received the money in 2001 when he was a private individual and did not use it for political activity.
The case of Odelia Carmon 2016
Ari Harow, a former chief of staff in Netanyahu's office, headed an American organization that has funded Odelia Carmon’s salary, who worked for Netanyahu during his tenure as an opposition leader. Harow is suspected of breaching trust and is likely to accept a $ 3 million deal.
Ari Harow urged senior officials in the attorney general's office and the police to conduct a deeper examination of Netanyahu and Carmon, who said, “Bibi entered a crazy hysteria and asked me to return the money.” The legal advisor decided to stop the examination, because in his opinion and eventually the evidence will be proved, and the judicial adviser closed the case.
The issue of submarines 2016
David Shomron, an Israeli lawyer and Netanyahu's cousin and a private attorney, in a special investigation conducted by Raviv Drucker (an investigative reporter for Channel 10) revealed in September 2016 that David Shomron represented Mickey Ganor (an Israeli businessman and former naval missile ship and company representative) before ThyssenKrupp, a German company, which manufactures weapons. He said that he had held negotiations to sign an agreement to supply three submarines from the company, claiming that there was a ‘conflict of interests’ between his deals and his family connection to Netanyahu, and the investigation is still ongoing.
File No. 1000 for the year 2016
The content of the file revolves around the request of Netanyahu and his wife from rich people to buy luxury items such as cigars and luxury beverages worth hundreds of thousands of shekels, including Arno Milichan, an Israeli businessman who is one of Hollywood's leading producers.
Attorney General Mandelblit authorized the police to investigate Netanyahu on suspicion of systematically accepting gifts from some millionaires. Ultimately, a decision was made to conduct an investigation cautiously, and evidence was collected that challenged the claim which changed the course of the issue.
File No. 2000 of 2016
Netanyahu tried to reach an agreement with the publisher of Yediot Ahronot newspaper, Noni Mozes, who received sympathetic coverage in the newspaper in exchange for reducing the activity of Israel Hayom newspaper. The police investigated Moses and then released him conditionally.
The legal advisor of the government said Attorney General Mandelblit had discussed the case in the spring of 2016, and only six months later he authorized opening an investigation with Netanyahu. The state prosecutor believes that the results of the investigation constitute a groundwork for an investigation with the prime minister, and the charges are being investigated.
In a series published by the PIC, we shed light on the most prominent cases of corruption that affected the Israeli leaders, which included the political, security, religious and social sectors.
In the first episode, prepared by the Translation and Monitoring Department of the PIC, we review the cases of the corruption of the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his family, according to Haaretz.
The Bar-On-Hebron case 1997
In his first term, Netanyahu appointed Roni Bar-On as a legal advisor to appease Aryeh Deri, in exchange for Shas’s support for the Hebron agreement.
At the end of the 90-day intensive investigation, in which 60 witnesses were questioned, the prime minister and eight ministers were questioned by the police that recommended directing criminal charges against Netanyahu and those accused of forgery, breach of trust (Avigdor Lieberman for breach of trust, Deri of blackmailing and threats).
The police recommended that Netanyahu be tried on charges of forgery and breach of trust. Police said it involved mixing legitimate political moves with actions which amount to criminal activity, and separating them is not easy task.
Prosecutor Rubinstein ruled that no indictment should be filed for the lack of sufficient evidence, and after the prosecution’s recommendation of opening a criminal case, the Attorney General announced the closure of the case.
Amedi case 1999
Netanyahu and his wife Sarah have spent money from the state coffers for private jobs at their home, suspected of giving and receiving bribes, fraud and obstructing interrogation procedures. The prosecution recommended that they should be tried for fraud and breach of trust.
The case began in September 1999 after the publication of an investigation on charges of corruption by Mordechai Gelat by Yediot newspaper that Netanyahu and his wife tried to transfer funds from the Prime Minister's Office to contractor Avner Amedi in the period leading up to his election and during his tenure. Netanyahu objected and rejected the charge against him. The price seemed unreasonable to him, and the prosecution recommended closing the case by the attorney general.
Bibi Torres case
The State Comptroller Shapira found there was a possibility of criminal activity. It is not appropriate for the Foreign Minister to finance the trip of Netanyahu and his wife. The Attorney-General has stated that the case is deliberate, and there is no evidence in it, thus the Attorney General closed the case
The garden furniture case 2015
Netanyahu and his wife moved the prime minister's garden furniture to their own house. The police recommended that Sarah Netanyahu be prosecuted for fraud, and the case focused on a number of issues that gave rise to suspicion of criminal offenses, including suspected fraud, and breach of trust.
The case was transferred to the Jerusalem District Attorney's Office in April 2016. Since then, the case has been reinstated to resume the investigation and remains in the Fraud Investigation Unit. Netanyahu's office replied that the allegation of irregularities was unfounded. The prime minister ran many meetings in the garden corner of his home, whether in Jerusalem or Caesarea, and even if a new set of garden furniture was purchased for use in Caesarea during the prime minister's term, it will be in accordance with procedures approved by the Ministry of Justice.
The electrician issue 2015
Sarah Netanyahu used the electrician close to the family in violation of the procedures and conditions of exceptional use at the expense of the state, and it was recommended that the police sue Sarah for fraud, and focused on a number of issues that arose because of the suspicion of criminal offenses.
The State Comptroller General Shapira raised doubts in this case. For three months, Sara Netanyahu invited Avi Fahima to work at the Caesarea headquarters, both on weekends when the price was more expensive, and the case remained in the hands of the Police Investigations Unit.
The issue of meals 2015
Sarah Netanyahu asked for food for family and private events at the expense of the prime minister's office; Meni Naftali, former director of the prime minister's office, claimed that Netanyahu's wife had passed a false number of the invitees to pay a larger amount of money. Instead of saying four, she said the food would be given for 10.
The issue of nursing care provider 2015
Sara Netanyahu spent money on nursing care from the prime minister's budget and it was recommended that the police sue Sarah for forgery and breach of trust. The case is still in the police investigation unit.
The case of Arnaud Mimran 2016
French Jewish millionaire Arnaud Mimran was convicted of paying 170,000 euros to Netanyahu and his family. Netanyahu's response was that he received the money in 2001 when he was a private individual and did not use it for political activity.
The case of Odelia Carmon 2016
Ari Harow, a former chief of staff in Netanyahu's office, headed an American organization that has funded Odelia Carmon’s salary, who worked for Netanyahu during his tenure as an opposition leader. Harow is suspected of breaching trust and is likely to accept a $ 3 million deal.
Ari Harow urged senior officials in the attorney general's office and the police to conduct a deeper examination of Netanyahu and Carmon, who said, “Bibi entered a crazy hysteria and asked me to return the money.” The legal advisor decided to stop the examination, because in his opinion and eventually the evidence will be proved, and the judicial adviser closed the case.
The issue of submarines 2016
David Shomron, an Israeli lawyer and Netanyahu's cousin and a private attorney, in a special investigation conducted by Raviv Drucker (an investigative reporter for Channel 10) revealed in September 2016 that David Shomron represented Mickey Ganor (an Israeli businessman and former naval missile ship and company representative) before ThyssenKrupp, a German company, which manufactures weapons. He said that he had held negotiations to sign an agreement to supply three submarines from the company, claiming that there was a ‘conflict of interests’ between his deals and his family connection to Netanyahu, and the investigation is still ongoing.
File No. 1000 for the year 2016
The content of the file revolves around the request of Netanyahu and his wife from rich people to buy luxury items such as cigars and luxury beverages worth hundreds of thousands of shekels, including Arno Milichan, an Israeli businessman who is one of Hollywood's leading producers.
Attorney General Mandelblit authorized the police to investigate Netanyahu on suspicion of systematically accepting gifts from some millionaires. Ultimately, a decision was made to conduct an investigation cautiously, and evidence was collected that challenged the claim which changed the course of the issue.
File No. 2000 of 2016
Netanyahu tried to reach an agreement with the publisher of Yediot Ahronot newspaper, Noni Mozes, who received sympathetic coverage in the newspaper in exchange for reducing the activity of Israel Hayom newspaper. The police investigated Moses and then released him conditionally.
The legal advisor of the government said Attorney General Mandelblit had discussed the case in the spring of 2016, and only six months later he authorized opening an investigation with Netanyahu. The state prosecutor believes that the results of the investigation constitute a groundwork for an investigation with the prime minister, and the charges are being investigated.
6 oct 2017
An Israeli drone fell on Friday evening near the southern border of the Gaza Strip with the 1948 occupied Palestinian territories, the Israeli army said.
The website of Maariv newspaper reported, quoting an unnamed spokesman for the Israeli army, that a "Sky Rider" aircraft crashed while conducting "routine military missions".
The spokesman did not say whether the drone crashed inside or outside the Gaza Strip, but he affirmed that it was not carrying any "sensitive information".
This is the tenth Israeli drone to crash since the beginning of 2017. Similar incidents were previously reported near the Gaza borders and in southern Lebanon, Golan Heights, and the occupied West Bank.
The website of Maariv newspaper reported, quoting an unnamed spokesman for the Israeli army, that a "Sky Rider" aircraft crashed while conducting "routine military missions".
The spokesman did not say whether the drone crashed inside or outside the Gaza Strip, but he affirmed that it was not carrying any "sensitive information".
This is the tenth Israeli drone to crash since the beginning of 2017. Similar incidents were previously reported near the Gaza borders and in southern Lebanon, Golan Heights, and the occupied West Bank.
5 oct 2017
Last month, members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations with Palestine (DPAL) called upon the EU to suspend its association agreement with Israel after visiting the occupied West Bank and witnessing the human rights violations inflicted upon Palestinians. One minor yet influential departure from the usual generic statements is the delegation’s experience of a sliver of the colonial violence meted out daily by Israel.
In their statement, published by the Wafa news agency, the delegation describes being “forced to take cover in a Palestinian shop as the Israeli army moved with lethal force against Palestinian residents using tear gas, stun grenades and live fire.” This episode occurred in Hebron, which the delegation described as “a microcosm of how the Israeli occupation manifests in practice, with a minority of settlers holding hostage a majority of Palestinians.”
The EU-Israel Association Agreement, which came into force in 2000, which the delegation has urged the EU to suspend, facilitates and prioritises Israel’s trade and research participation, subject to a clause which is routinely ignored. Article 2 of the Association Agreement states that: “Relations between the Parties, as well as the provisions of the Agreement itself, shall be based on respect for human rights and democratic principles, which guides their internal and international policy and constitutes an essential element of this agreement.”
Obligations on both sides have been neglected. The refusal to suspend Israel’s participation is a reflection of the diplomacy at an international level which is prioritised over the protection of human rights. Israel has not honoured Article 2 of the agreement, while the EU has continued to turn a blind eye when it comes to the settler-colonial state’s violation of human rights and of its own stipulated clauses.
In their statement the MEPs have managed to impart the political and humanitarian impact of Israel’s violations upon the Palestinian people, particularly in their descriptions of forced displacement and settlement construction as “war crimes under international law”. The statement imparts an awareness of swift decline in the erasure of Palestine and Palestinians, however there is no departure from the two-state rhetoric which is the foundation upon which the EU has based its diplomacy with Israel and which continues to influence the institution’s reticence to define Israel’s colonial character.
The DPAL delegation stressed:
The two-state solution will only be achieved when Israel starts feeling the consequences for their illegal action.
While the statement is partly true as regards facing accountability, it is also important to note that the two-state compromise seeks to maintain the earlier colonisation efforts by providing a purported solution which absolves Israel of its 1948 crimes, in particular the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian population. Commitment to the two-state solution in the current scenario is also an affirmation of acquiescence with the concept of Israel as an inherently violent state.
Even if, hypothetically, the two-state scenario materialises, both DPAL and the EU should recognise that the imposition does not take into account the illegal means by which Israel came into existence and how this existence is the source of rupture when it comes to the Palestinian right of return. Hence, suspension of the agreement should be the first step in upholding accountability both ways – Israel should face accountability for its violations emanating from its existence while the EU’s introspection should include a thorough opposition to facilitating the colonial enterprise at the expense of the Palestinian population.
In their statement, published by the Wafa news agency, the delegation describes being “forced to take cover in a Palestinian shop as the Israeli army moved with lethal force against Palestinian residents using tear gas, stun grenades and live fire.” This episode occurred in Hebron, which the delegation described as “a microcosm of how the Israeli occupation manifests in practice, with a minority of settlers holding hostage a majority of Palestinians.”
The EU-Israel Association Agreement, which came into force in 2000, which the delegation has urged the EU to suspend, facilitates and prioritises Israel’s trade and research participation, subject to a clause which is routinely ignored. Article 2 of the Association Agreement states that: “Relations between the Parties, as well as the provisions of the Agreement itself, shall be based on respect for human rights and democratic principles, which guides their internal and international policy and constitutes an essential element of this agreement.”
Obligations on both sides have been neglected. The refusal to suspend Israel’s participation is a reflection of the diplomacy at an international level which is prioritised over the protection of human rights. Israel has not honoured Article 2 of the agreement, while the EU has continued to turn a blind eye when it comes to the settler-colonial state’s violation of human rights and of its own stipulated clauses.
In their statement the MEPs have managed to impart the political and humanitarian impact of Israel’s violations upon the Palestinian people, particularly in their descriptions of forced displacement and settlement construction as “war crimes under international law”. The statement imparts an awareness of swift decline in the erasure of Palestine and Palestinians, however there is no departure from the two-state rhetoric which is the foundation upon which the EU has based its diplomacy with Israel and which continues to influence the institution’s reticence to define Israel’s colonial character.
The DPAL delegation stressed:
The two-state solution will only be achieved when Israel starts feeling the consequences for their illegal action.
While the statement is partly true as regards facing accountability, it is also important to note that the two-state compromise seeks to maintain the earlier colonisation efforts by providing a purported solution which absolves Israel of its 1948 crimes, in particular the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian population. Commitment to the two-state solution in the current scenario is also an affirmation of acquiescence with the concept of Israel as an inherently violent state.
Even if, hypothetically, the two-state scenario materialises, both DPAL and the EU should recognise that the imposition does not take into account the illegal means by which Israel came into existence and how this existence is the source of rupture when it comes to the Palestinian right of return. Hence, suspension of the agreement should be the first step in upholding accountability both ways – Israel should face accountability for its violations emanating from its existence while the EU’s introspection should include a thorough opposition to facilitating the colonial enterprise at the expense of the Palestinian population.
4 oct 2017
Israeli right wing Education Minister Naftali Bennett called on Israel to terminate the transfer of tax revenue to the Palestinian Authority (PA), in response to both Palestine’s new membership in the INTERPOL and to the current reconciliation process between Hamas and the PA.
In yet another extremist statement, he said that, “Israel must stop acting as [an] ATM for terrorism…This isn’t a Palestinian reconciliation, but rather Mahmoud Abbas cozying up to a murderous terror organization,” adding that “Transferring funds to a Hamas government is like Israel transferring money to ISIS in return for the cash. We’ll get missiles fired at us.”
This is not the first time Bennett has made extremist right wing statements, according to the PNN, as he previously said that more people should have been “eliminated” in the war on Gaza, calling them “terrorists”.
Bennett said that three conditions would be set as conditions for continuing to transfer funds to the PA, including the return of two bodies of Israeli soldiers killed in the 2014 war on Gaza. Bennett is expected to bring up these demands in the upcoming cabinet meeting.
Meanwhile, Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu condemned the Palestinian unity government, saying that the state “won’t accept reconciliation at the expense of Israel’s existence.”
Netanyahu spoke at a Likud meeting in Ma’aleh Adumimin settlement block where he described an “imaginary appeasement where the Palestinian side is reconciling at the expense of our existence,” adding that anyone who discusses a peace process must recognize Israel as a “Jewish” state.
He explained, “Whoever wants to reconcile, our position is very simple, Recognize the state of Israel, dismantle Hamas’ military wing, cut ties with Iran that calls for our destruction, these are very clear things that we have previously and clearly stated.”
Netanyahu’s remarks came just hours after Bennett’s call for the halt of the revenue transfer.
05/17/15 Bennett Wants to See Palestinians Become ‘Water Carriers and Wood Hewers’ for Jews
In yet another extremist statement, he said that, “Israel must stop acting as [an] ATM for terrorism…This isn’t a Palestinian reconciliation, but rather Mahmoud Abbas cozying up to a murderous terror organization,” adding that “Transferring funds to a Hamas government is like Israel transferring money to ISIS in return for the cash. We’ll get missiles fired at us.”
This is not the first time Bennett has made extremist right wing statements, according to the PNN, as he previously said that more people should have been “eliminated” in the war on Gaza, calling them “terrorists”.
Bennett said that three conditions would be set as conditions for continuing to transfer funds to the PA, including the return of two bodies of Israeli soldiers killed in the 2014 war on Gaza. Bennett is expected to bring up these demands in the upcoming cabinet meeting.
Meanwhile, Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu condemned the Palestinian unity government, saying that the state “won’t accept reconciliation at the expense of Israel’s existence.”
Netanyahu spoke at a Likud meeting in Ma’aleh Adumimin settlement block where he described an “imaginary appeasement where the Palestinian side is reconciling at the expense of our existence,” adding that anyone who discusses a peace process must recognize Israel as a “Jewish” state.
He explained, “Whoever wants to reconcile, our position is very simple, Recognize the state of Israel, dismantle Hamas’ military wing, cut ties with Iran that calls for our destruction, these are very clear things that we have previously and clearly stated.”
Netanyahu’s remarks came just hours after Bennett’s call for the halt of the revenue transfer.
05/17/15 Bennett Wants to See Palestinians Become ‘Water Carriers and Wood Hewers’ for Jews
