The latest entry in the “Texts from Hillary” meme.
I was shocked this morning when I began my usual google search for news from Israel. The very first story as I scrolled down to “news” was an AP article titled “Israel airport asks traveller to open email to inspection” which began, “JERUSALEM—When Sandra Tamari arrived at Israel’s international airport…”
I practically jumped off the mattress! It was published by an outfit from CTVWinnipeg. Upon further search I realized this article by Josef Federman and Diaa Hadid had saturated the mainstream media. And it picks up the deportation, first reported on our site, of Najwa Doughman and Sasha al-Sarabi.
The Boston Globe, Seattle Times and many other outlets have published this important story, in which Federman and Hadid informed readers of the context:
Israel has become increasingly strict following a series of run-ins with international activists in recent years, highlighted by a deadly clash two years ago between Israeli naval commandos and a flotilla trying to break Israel’s naval blockade of the Gaza Strip. Both sides accused the other of provoking the violence in which nine Turkish activists were killed.
Since then, Israel has prevented international activists from arriving on similar flotillas as well as a pair of “fly-ins” by pro-Palestinian activists. Israeli officials acknowledge they used social media accounts, such as Facebook and Twitter, to identify activists ahead of time and prevent them from boarding flights to Israel.
Emanuel Gross, a law professor at Haifa University, said such a practice would seem to be illegal in Israel.
“In Israel, you need a search warrant to go into somebody’s computer,” he said. “I’m skeptical that the security guards asked a judge first for a warrant and I’m skeptical that a judge would give it.”
Gawker also picked up the story, with the great headline, “US Tourists with ‘Arab Names’ Forced to Undergo Invasive Email Searches at Israeli Airport.” Tablet is on it too.
And we were thrilled to read Sami Kishawi at Sixteen Minutes to Palestine going over the top for us in saying that we are helping to democratize the discourse.
Let’s be clear, the byline on this scoop was Najwa Doughman and Sasha Al-Sarabi. This is about all of us working together in so many ways to change the discourse. It’s citizen journalism, people telling their stories in their own voices. Stories arrive in our inboxes or land in our twitter feeds because we all know if we do not speak up, who will speak for us? Here’s Kishawi:
At this year’s Google Zeitgeist conference, former Al Jazeera producer and current Huffington Post columnist Ahmed Shihab-Eldin spoke about citizen journalism and its growing effect on mainstream media. He drew attention to the emergence of independent blogs as a crucial medium for reportage, one that expands the depth of today’s journalism and “democratizes” the discourse. …
It is important to note that had Tamari, Doughman, or Al-Sarabi remained silent about their grueling experiences under interrogation, Mondoweiss wouldn’t have had any stories to run. And had Mondoweiss not helped push the narratives to a wider public, the Associated Press wouldn’t have had a story to put on the wire.
Let this encourage everyone to share their stories—good or bad—because, for now at least, this might be the only efficient way to publicly document injustice.
(my bold)
Sometimes the personal humiliation becomes too much to bear so how can we put it on the internet and share what is most fragile to us? Especially knowing for the rest of our lives we will remain exposed. But it is precisely those experiences, of Doughman breaking into tears, and the hopelessness of Tamari’s realization our embassy would do nothing to assist her, that reaches the commonality of all of us because ultimately, we share more in common than not.
For years we have relied on reporters such as Amira Hass– who covered this report today in Haaretz ”Israel airport security demands access to tourists’ private email accounts”–and in turn Hass has relied on people on the ground who experience and witness. Journalists may have more training, but they don’t have a corner on the truth, or on human expression, or independence of thought. If we keep speaking, they will hear us because we are not the sound of one hand clapping. We are millions clapping and shouting and demanding justice.
A huge shout out to Josef Federman and Diaa Hadid for hearing the voices of Tamari, Doughman and Al-Sarabi. A huge shout out to everyone who tweets and shares and won’t shut up. And to activists on the ground doing the yeoman’s work, everyday you change our hearts. If it were not for the real people documenting atrocities, who would believe us?
So thank you everyone for giving me faith we can change the world. Hillary and Barack, can you hear us?
It is never late to learn, Annie. It helps to reduce stress levels and hype.
“Fourth Amendment permits warrantless searches of the contents of laptop computers and other electronic storage devices”
link to help.cbp.gov
link to fas.org
Cheerio!
Hostage will be bringing the Charmin to wipe you up.
dimadok, could you please cite the part where they haul out their own laptop and make you check your email on it? that is not searching the contents of a persons laptop. especially not if you left it at home. maybe you missed the story:
Dimadok – You haven’t answered Annie’s distinction between an “electronic storage device” that the passenger carries and an email account that lives on a server in another country.
Additionally, even setting aside that your links address US law, not Israeli law, your second link shows that this is more complicated than you make out.
The U.S. Supreme Court has yet to address this
matter. Some lower federal courts, however, have held that searches of laptops and other forms of
electronic storage devices fall under the border search exception.126 Yet, these courts have also
been far more reticent in determining whether these types of searches are routine or non-routine.
Instead, they have found that reasonable suspicion supported the searches, and, thus, they did not
reach the question.127 Even when a court has held that searches of electronic storage devices were
routine, there has usually been an accompanying finding of reasonable suspicion to support the
searches.128 The one exception is the Ninth Circuit, which has expressly held that reasonable
suspicion is not required to support a border search of an electronic storage device.129
The suspicion that the Israeli border guards had regarding the two ladies was their Arab names. That’s not “reasonable suspicion.”
Interesting thing is ” reasonable suspicion” – as one who was trained in profiling and border control, I can tell that common reason and security officer reason are quite different. Same as a Israel visa stamp in any passport will bring trouble to its owner in Arab country. They may think that they were affected due to their Arab names- however every day hundreds of Arabs, dozens of Iranians and even Lebanese enter Israel. It a very grey area there.
yeah, it’s those quakers that will get you every time.
Seriously, they were banned because of the combination of being Arab and being involved in BDS and other forms of activism.
How dangerous could they have been if they caved to a demand to search their email account?
This is classic Israeli overkill. And just like the overly aggressive response of Israel to the Mavi Marmara, it’s coming back to bite them.
>> “Fourth Amendment permits warrantless searches of the contents of laptop computers and other electronic storage devices”
So…the Internet is now considered a laptop computer or other electronic storage device. Interesting.
Like the Zio-supremacist said: “It is never late to learn.”
Of course. if you don’t want to provide the password for your e-mail it’s not like they’d waterboard you for it. Just wouldn’t let you into a country that they have a right not to let you into.
But they had all ready knew they were not going to be allowed in. So why give it to them then? Clearly they felt really intimidated.
Of course. if you don’t want to provide the password for your e-mail it’s not like they’d waterboard you for it. Just wouldn’t let you into a country that they have a right not to let you into.
Fred the lawyer in the AP story explained that these officers need permission from a Court and that he doubts a Court would grant permission. So the officer would have to come up with some other legal fiction to deny entry to these travelers and detain them.
He said they need permission from a court to force someone to let them search the laptop. He didn’t say they need it if they have consent, nor that they had to let a non-consenting person into the country.
In America, the protections that apply elsewhere (4th Amendment right to not be searched) don’t apply at the border (or at customes at an international airport), even for citizens returning to the country. It’s probably the same in Israel and the professor shouldn’t have been speaking off the cuff about it without checking.
Fred the statutes that I cited have been used by the FBI to request arrests and extradition of people who accessed US servers from Israel, including Ehud Tenebaum. I believe that he was convicted in an Israeli Court under the applicable Israeli law which prohibited unauthorized access of the US servers.
The officer in this article merely asked the young lady to log in to her own account. The article doesn’t indicate that she asked for permission to open emails, much less that she granted permission to conduct global searches of the contents. The officer was just snooping without a warrant. The US courts have even affirmed convictions of employees with system administrator privileges on a server for exceeding their authorized access in order to obtain private information without explicit permission from the owner or the individuals involved, e.g. link to apps.americanbar.org
P.S. Here is an article by a cyberlaw attorney in Israel in the subject of these searches at +972: Is Israel’s search through visitors’ email accounts legal?
link to 972mag.com
After you have all ready been told you will not be allowed to enter the country?
dimadok June 5, 2012 at 3:35 pm
It is never late to learn dimadok.
US law is not Israeli law
and;
it was not her laptop or storage device being searched
dimadok Annie is correct. The relevant question here isn’t whether the 4th Amendment protects a laptop in Israel, it’s whether or not you have violated the criminal code in the jurisdiction where the mail server is located here in the US.
The lawyer mentioned in the article, Emanuel Gross, explained that you would need to obtain a warrant in Israel to search someone’s email. That is certainly the case here in the US. Government officials require a warrant or subpoena to obtain access to email accounts in accordance with 18 USC Chapter 121 – Stored Wire And Electronic Communications And Transactional Records Access. — link to law.cornell.edu
Use of coercion or social engineering to gain unauthorized access or exceeding authorized access to the stored emails doesn’t alter the requirements for the government to obtain permission from a court prior to conducting a search and to properly protect information once it has been downloaded to the officer’s computer. For example, downloaded emails can contain records from financial institutions with information on credit card accounts & etc. that are protected by other state and federal statutes, like 18 USC § 1030.
There was a recent flap here in the US about prospective employers asking for passwords. I believe the consensus was that that violated the TOS. The DoJ wanted (11/2011) to make violating the TOS a felony. I’m not sure if that ever made it into law or not.
CNET: link to news.cnet.com
Is it a fact that government agencies can access your emails, etc with legal permission but that individual can not access records to find out that there email has been accessed?
Hi Kathleen,
I think what you’re talking about are called National Security Letters. They allow government agencies access to your communications and contain a gag order saying the service provider can’t disclose they’re given away your information.
See also Wikileak’s Jacob Applebaum (he found out there were NSLs that had been used against him) on Democracy Now from April being interviewed with NSA whistleblower William Binney, who claims that the NSA are lying, and that they have copies of and are [illegally] accessing most emails ever sent to, from and via America:
Democracy Now: Whistleblower: The NSA is Lying–U.S. Government Has Copies of Most of Your Emails
That clip is part of a multi-part series DN did on state surveillance, well worth watching the full interview and the different parts.
I’ve long believed that the UK secret services could intercept anything they want, or want badly enough, whenever they want and would tell their international friends anything of interest. Laws restricting secret organisations can only be for show in the sense that an exception will always be made when the organisation has convinced itself that there is an emergency. Which is not to say that I think people who work in secret are nasty people or have no conscience: it’s just the position that they are in.
Even Fox news reported on this…and credited Mondo…and did quote the Israeli attorney on illegal search.
link to foxnews.com
*”Tamari and Doughman’s cases were first reported on the left-wing blog Mondoweiss.”
“Israeli officials acknowledge they used social media accounts, such as Facebook and Twitter, to identify activists ahead of time and prevent them from boarding flights to Israel.”
”Emanuel Gross, a law professor at Haifa University, said such a practice would seem to be illegal in Israel.
“In Israel, you need a search warrant to go into somebody’s computer,” he said. “I’m skeptical that the security guards asked a judge first for a warrant and I’m skeptical that a judge would give it.”
“It is never late to learn” … I understand this must be the reason why you visit Mondoweiss ever so often Dim …
Thank Pat Buchanan too. If he hadn’t quoted Phil *at length* two weeks ago on antiwar.com and The American Conservative, you wouldn’t have had clearly mainstream voices go “Oh-Oh.”
No matter what you think of Pat Buchanan, he is clearly one you don’t want identifying you as a pea under his mattress. The man can write his way out of a paper bag, and he can incite paleo-conservatives to near-riot. His writing is FAR more measured than his speech, and is taken seriously by the center-right and far-right for that reason.
Buchanan did MW a serious favor. I havent checked the Alexa stats but I suspect they will show that.
Linked to that article at MW. I agree about Buchanan. Lots I disagree with but the “anti-semite” label placed on him by the I lobby decades ago just is not the case. Also respect that he has brought the I/P issue up on MSM outlets many times, stood against the invasion of Iraq. At the Dem convention in Denver Buchanan was on stage with Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow etc. He paid then candidate Obama so many compliments I yelled out “come on out of the closet Pat, know you are a closet Dem” He looked at me and laughed. I chided him again. I think he down deep supported Obama.
“I think he down deep supported Obama.”
Thaty is in itself reason enough to reject the guy, who otherwise has always been respectful of civilized coexistence, while your Obama is a Zionist slave. Enough electoral propaganda on this Palestine support site!
“the “anti-semite” label”: that shouldn’t be a major priority for a Palestine support site. There are enough anti-racist publications and web sites for that, too.
The I lobby labeled Pat Buchanan an “anti-semite” several decades ago. Show me where he has made “anti Jewish” comments. I have heard him criticize Israel’s policies and U.S. policies having to do with supporting Israel no matter what they do. I have never heard him make an “anti Jewish” comment. Link please…
You didn’t read. Of course he never was “anti-semitic”. What is ridiculous is that anybody would be concerned about it here as mentioned by yourself, your insulting him by attributing him, a respecter of international law, the intention to support Obama, a champion of illegality sold to the Zionists. And your electioneering.
It was not so obvious in the summer of 2008 that Obama was “a champion of illegality sold to the Zionists”. I was already myself very skeptical of him because of his reversal on the FISA “reform” and his talk about expanding the Afghanistan war, which would be the reasons I eventually voted third-party in November, but I did take the view that he would be better than McCain. And perhaps Buchanan did too, then.
I just checked Alexa.com. Pat Buchanan published his piece on Bill Kristol and the Arabists on May 28, 2012. Antiwar.com
There has been a 90% increase in traffic as a result. Check it out yourself.
How do you check the increase in traffic? Wondering why Comcast/MSNBC gave Buchanan the boot? Did not read the book that they said they were objecting to. Buchanan was one of the only MSNBCers who stood against the invasion of Iraq and has been talking facts about Iran. Maybe the owners do not like this…although Dylan Ratigan does this also. I think Ratigan is the treasure on MSNBC. He hits the ball out of the park on the lack of accountability having to do with Iraq, Wall Street etc.
Kathleen,
First this:
link to alexa.com
Then this:
Change the chart time underneath it to TRAILING I MONTH.
P.S. The rise has risen to 150% from 90% earlier today.
MW should ask Buchanan to write for this site. And Morris Berman.
thanks
Buchanan’s piece at antiwar.com
link to original.antiwar.com
His latest on Syria. Really lines up with the Leveretts take on the situation with Syria
link to original.antiwar.com
Kathleen,
Buchanan is brilliant in this piece. And says no less than what Zbigniew Brzezinski said to Bernstein, Haass, Señor, and Ignatius last week on MSNBC.
God save us from the stupid–and I mean profoundly unintelligent–neocons.
That was an incredible encounter between Dr. B ,Bernstein, Haass, Senor, and Ignatius. Dr. B wiped up the with Bernstein’s, Ignatius and Senor’s “let’s go get Syria and Iran” warmongering. Haass was more subtle. Bernstein was called a “neocon” I really liked when the camera slipped back to a few of the Syria and Iran warmongers faces as Dr. B knocked out their silly and dangerous ideas in the second round. Dr. B even became a bit riled up.
I don’t think the neocons are “profoundly unintelligent” I think they are some of the most dangerous people on earth. A collective group of psychopaths with an immense regard for themselves and “their people” who also have a great deal of power and reach. They have little to no regard for the lives or the well being of the “others” who they use for their agenda or kill in the process of that agenda.
Project for a New American and Israeli Century. link to newamericancentury.org
Cannot find that clip of Dr. B with Senor, Bernstein, Ignatius etc at Morning Joe. Glad you reminded me of that morning
John McCain was just interviewed on bbcR4 re Syria. He wants to establish a protected safe haven for the rebels, he wants to arm them, BUT he does not want to intercept arms deliveries to the Assad regime, or to destroy those arms they have. What kind of quagmire is he imagining for Syria and the region?!
Kathleen, here’s the Dr. Brzezinski clip on Morning Joe, MSNBC:
link to msnbc.msn.com
If you want to download it, copy this link, and paste it into your download window. It’s a Flash file. You might need to find a converter to view on certain devices. Otherwise, download VLC and it will play on any operating system.
link to msnbc.msn.com
There has been a 90% increase in traffic as a result. Check it out yourself”…MRW
Fantastic…thank you Pat.
Buchanan has been given a bad rap imo. He is ,unlike Newt, actually a superb historian and a very incisive thinker and writer…..he cuts to the chase with a sharp knife….that’s why the zios hate him.
Up 190% over past 7 days.
I think there is an increasing global appetite for stories that paint Israel as it is, its warts in high definition beyond the range of hasbara makeup. Going over that media cliff thinking the world still supports it.
link to youtube.com
Mark Toner was asked again about Ms. Tamari at yesterday’s State Department press briefing, but he gave a most unsatisfactory answer:
Hopefully he’ll be asked about Doughman and Al-Sarabi.
The American hostages In Iran in 1979 did not sign Privacy Act (1974) waivers, and the US State Dept talked about them all the time.
good one
perhaps someone should alert Ms Tamari to get in touch with the WH press office and sign a Privacy Act waiver so they can explain what’s up with our embassy in tel aviv.
Tamari doesn’t have to give up her privacy rights. It is the embassy that has to explain whether foreign service laws were complied with, or not. Hostage wrote, and linked to, what they are. The issue is “American citizen” not mr or mrs so-and-so for whom different laws might apply, like not being Jewish enough. Ain’t in our Constitution.
Mark Toner was asked again at yesterday’s (Tuesday’s) press briefing, and, although he still didn’t give a good answer, it seems Ms. Tamari did sign a Privacy Act waiver:
RE: “Israel airport asks traveller to open email to inspection” ~ AP article
MY COMMENT: If it looks like
a duckfascism, swims likea duckfascism, and quacks likea duckfascism, then it probably isa duckfascism.Duck test – link to en.wikipedia.org
Speaking of fascist ducks, here’s the beginning of a piece entitled Israel: It’s called fascism posted just last week by the wonderful Michel Warschawski of the Alternative Information Center in Jerusalem and Beit Sahour:
There are only 2 problems with this.
First, that Mondoweiss is nearly always described in the MSM as being virulently biased and anti-Israel and secondly, any kind of internet search quickly reveals that Najwa Doughman has a history as a BDS and anti-Israel student activist.
So what this means to me is that she and her friend have clearly lied about themselves to the airport and security authorities. Now that they’ve been deported as undesirable security threats they and their associates can expect future security problems in other places.
Now that they’ve been deported as undesirable security threats they and their associates can expect future security problems in other places.
why, because they do not support apartheid? there are no palestinians who support the occupation and very likely no friends of palestinians who support the occupation.
what this amounts to is israel not allowing palestinians to have visitors. i was made to sign a form when i entered israel promising not to visit any area under the ‘authority’ of the palestinian authority.
this is the holy land. jerusalem does not belong to israel. this is the home of the three major religions and there is no reason one should have to be a zionist to visit palestine.
Mondoweiss is nearly always described in the MSM as being virulently biased and anti-Israel
prove it. go ahead and prove it. tablet is not msm and tablet is not less biased than mondoweiss. the entire media structure is pro zionists biased against non zionists. that’s nothing new, we already know that.
read:
Constructing the Prototypical Terrorist in America: Arab, Muslim, and Palestinian.
link to mondoweiss.net
by Noura Erakat link to jadaliyya.com
Indeed you don’t have to be Zionist to visit Israel, moreover you may hate us guts- and it’s ok until you are actively participate in actions undermining the existence of the State you are trying to get into
uh huh. speaking of actively undermining the existence of the State have you heard of the jhiad chicken brigade?
israel really taught them a lesson tonight. massacred another chicken farm in gaza. those iof dudes are really amazing.
Behold the Tough Jew – chicken murderers.
Please do realize that the MSM stories are painting Israel, not Mondoweiss, in a negative light. For all the linguistic contortionism Zionists may deploy to justify the searches, messing with someone’s privacy and right to free-thought is not easily stomached in the West.
These two ladies clearly presented no risk at all to Israel’s security, but rather to its image. Unfortunately for the country, the latter has suffered more from Israel’s own actions than from those of the “anti Israel activists” they sought to neutralize.
Now that they’ve been deported as undesirable security threats they and their associates can expect future security problems in other places.
Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?
this is brian’s first comment. he has arrived with a bang flying his racist flag high. how lucky for us.
Another fallacy in logic argument.
Another fallacy in logic argument.
If A is published by B, and C doesn’t like B, then A must be wrong.
Because C and a foreign country might concur, then A will be vilified globally, surreptitiously, no matter what protections offered by A’s country because a commenter on B said so. Where’s Mooser?
Norman Finkelstein has been banned from entering Israel
link to democracynow.org
Archbishop Tutu and other UN members were banned from entering Israel
link to ynetnews.com
Noam Chomsky was banned from entering Israel
link to ynetnews.com
Like Noam Chomsky, Archbishop Tutu who were denied entry into Israel and Norman Finkelstein who has been banned from entering Israel. Israel has become a security threat to Israel.
They will have “security problems at other places” only if you stalk them yourself and harass and terrorize them with your feeble logic and absolute ignorance of both the facts and how security at OTHER countries works.
And I’m sure that you will stalk them because that’s what minions like you do.
P.S. – Not everyone is a fascist like your beloved Israel.
“First, that Mondoweiss is nearly always described in the MSM as being virulently biased and anti-Israel” Show us..so easy to link. Some proof please
”Now that they’ve been deported as undesirable security threats they and their associates can expect future security problems in other places.”..Brian Esker
Really?….who’s going to give them a problem?…you?
“Mondoweiss is nearly always described in the MSM as virulently biased”
and Obama is a Communist who wants to impose Sharia on USA.
Why Socialist Republic of Vietnam does not exert tiniest diligence in checking if visitors are anti-Communist or not? Because they are not at war with college girls and bicyclists? Ah, little old ladies from Minnesota got broken wrists and gashed heads, it is better to keep them out too. This is how we can recognized anti-Semites: who got clubbed, shot at, shoved or humiliated.
Historical record shows what kind of security threat we are talking about. Attacking Border Police by standing on a sidewalk with a flag of a NATO country in hand, and getting eye gouged out by direct shot from grenade launcher (for which tear gas canisters are listed as “less lethal munitions”). Renting a bike in Ramallah and having the temerity to use a public road.
Since the population of college girls undergoes replacement, in one-two years folks will know to NEVER post under own names, and to maintain e-mail account for non-political mail and hobbies. Then Israel airport security will have to test suspicious passengers by showing them Netanyahu’s speech to American Congress and check if they have involuntary gagging reflexes (or how many times they spontaneously clap).
OT, but I think this segment of a DKos thread would be of interest to the people here, since volleyboy mentions MW:
They really do believe in free speech, don’t they? Those numbers mean I got eight “hide rates” for my first comment (asking whether the Pentagon and the WTC really had no military significance), and six hide rates for my second comment, about the book about the diversion of highly enriched uranium to Israel. Of course that second comment was my real crime. Note volleyboy’s reference to Mondoweiss. He obviously reads this site often enough to know that I have been posting here.
He obviously reads this site often enough to know that I have been posting here.
they are glued to it. totally glued to it. i do not miss those hide rates at all. i didn’t get a lot of them, but i was completely unwelcome there. it was a negative environment of me. i am so very lucky to have found mondoweiss. the attitude of some of the posters there ( “Do yourself a favor and(3+ / 0-) shut the fuck up on this topic.”) is so pervasive. this macho thingamagig they have going that is completely accepted.
speaking of glued to the site. did anyone read the tablet link? a tad bizarre. i think it may be dawning on some people the tide is shifting the ground beneath their feet. mondoweiss just feels more and more normal all the time.
That’s because you are acclimating to the echo chamber. Cults are very comfortable to their members as well. Since you are surrounded by people who agree with you.
The factual Mondoweiss comments have been “normal” in the circles of people who have been working on pushing Reps, media outlets etc to stand up to the I lobby for decades. Clearly the new surge of activity and participants is really shaking things up. But still nothing changing on the ground. In fact as Art Gish used to say “getting worse.” Israel is illegally swallowing up the West Bank and E Jerusalem. There is going to be no other choice but a one state solution.
It’s called “google” google it. You post here under the same screen name, all he had to do was google your screen name and Israel mondoweiss would pop up.
But why would he or anybody else think of doing such a Google search?
Hello again. I see that some of you weren’t pleased with my comment.
@Annie “…why, because they do not support apartheid? there are no palestinians who support the occupation and very likely no friends of palestinians who support the occupation….”
Hmmm. That’s kind of interesting. There actually are a lot of Palestinian Arabs who would really just like to see an end to the occupation and walls and extraordinary security measures & are already working together with Israelis in a number of ways towards a more normal existence and an eventual 2 state solution. That includes the western supported Palestinian police force in the West Bank.
We all know that “apartheid” as Annie uses it doesn’t really apply to Israel.
“We all know that “apartheid” as Annie uses it doesn’t really apply to Israel.”
this is brian’s second comment. [after] he has arrived with a bang flying his racist flag, he already sets his standard pretty low with what looks like the dumbest comment.
how lucky for us.
“We all know that “apartheid” as Annie uses it doesn’t really apply to Israel.”
Welcome, Brian. Here’s what the experts (the South African Human Sciences Research Council) have to say on the subject:
link to electronicintifada.net
And if you haven’t got time to read the 300-page report, here’s a summary:
link to icahdusa.org
Archbishop Tutu knows a little about apartheid
link to news.bbc.co.uk
South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu has accused Israel of practising apartheid in its policies towards the Palestinians.
The Nobel peace laureate said he was “very deeply distressed” by a visit to the Holy Land, adding that “it reminded me so much of what happened to us black people in South Africa”.
The Jewish lobby is powerful – very powerful. Well, so what?
Archbishop Desmond Tutu
In a speech in the United States, carried in the UK’s Guardian newspaper, Archbishop Tutu said he saw “the humiliation of the Palestinians at checkpoints and roadblocks, suffering like us when young white police officers prevented us from moving about”.
The archbishop, who was a leading opponent of apartheid in South Africa, said Israel would “never get true security and safety through oppressing another people”.
link to youtube.com
Brian says:
“we all know that apartheid as Annie uses it…
Now Brian, I personally do not know what do you mean by “we all” as at MW we have a consensus that Israel is an apartheid and fascist state, far beyond what once SA was, therefore you must have a huge supply of unknown supporters.
They probably eat ziocain for breakfast!
As far as those palestinians, who are ready to or already work with israeli forces, are not the majority of the people, but bought politicians and their henchmen. Those are traitors to their country and people and one day will pay for it. Quislings have a short lifespan and may end their life dangling in the fresh air.
Arafat had over 50 million dollars in swiss accounts, stolen from his people, and the present leaders are cut from the same fabric. Their interests lie in having a luxorious life and stash as much cash away as possible before they are asked to account for their deeds.
Every occupied and colonized land had such traitors, living off the bloods of their compatriots. As an occupier I may use them to my purpose, but never trust them.
Former President Jimmy Carter… “but there is no doubt that within the occupied territories Palestinian land that there is a horrendous example of apartheid”
This is a great clip of Carter talking about apartheid in the West Bank
link to youtube.com
Welcome Brian. Congratulations for recently graduating from Hasbara U. Nice use of a strawman in your post. I know they promised you frequent flyer miles for point scoring but you’ll have to better than that to earn points here.
We all know that “apartheid” as Annie uses it doesn’t really apply to Israel.
It actually applies to hundreds of Jewish-only communal settlements in Israel and the occupied territories and the two-tiered system of municipal law that denies equality to citizens registered with the Interior Ministry as persons of non-Jewish “nationality”. Here’s how:
1. apartheid: 1947 (policy begun 1948), from Afrikaans apartheid (1929 in a S.African socio-political context), lit. “separateness,” from Dutch apart “separate” (from French àpart; see apart) + suffix -heid, cognate of English -hood,” i.e. separate + neighborhood or enclave:
–http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=apartheid
2. You’re probably not aware of the fact, but the term “apartheid” was just a synonym for legally entrenched forms of racial segregation and discrimination. In the early 1960s the United States, South Africa, and other countries were under tremendous pressure over their official policies of racial segregation and discriminatory laws that governed civil rights. The South Africans engaged in semantics and deployed the terms “apartheid” and “separate development” in defense of their practices in exactly the same way the US had relied on the “separate but equal” doctrine prior to Brown vs. Board of Education.
3. The practice of apartheid, or any related form of racial segregation, was first prohibited in international law by Article 3 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination:
– link to www2.ohchr.org
4. The State Parties to that Convention have established their own independent elected panel of legal experts who monitor the individual member states for compliance with the Treaty. Their periodic reviews of Israel have always identified examples of practices that are prohibited in accordance with Article 3:
*1998 link to unhcr.org
*2007 link to unhcr.org
* 2012 link to www2.ohchr.org
5. Article 1 of the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid declared that apartheid is a crime against humanity and that inhuman acts resulting from the policies and practices of apartheid and similar policies and practices of racial segregation and discrimination were an international crime.
The scope of the crime contained in the definition outlined in Article 2 explicitly included “similar policies and practices of racial segregation and discrimination” to those enumerated in a non-exhaustive list of acts “practised in southern Africa,” i.e. Namibia, Rhodesia, Mozambique, Angola, and South Africa. So the definition has always included racial segregation, racial discrimination, and similar crimes committed by other states. The Rome Statute made that abundantly clear.
*http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/apartheid-supp.html
*http://untreaty.un.org/cod/icc/STATUTE/99_corr/cstatute.htm
@ Hasbara buster “… the MSM stories are painting Israel, not Mondoweiss, in a negative light. …These two ladies clearly presented no risk at all to Israel’s security, but rather to its image. …”
Nope, haven’t seen that all, except for maybe the media out of Iran or something. Most folks understand the need for airport security and defensible borders.
So what do other countries do when they intercept suspected saboteurs, provocateurs or spies? In Iran, Syria, Myanmar, China, North Korea & many other places … they are incarcerated, abused, tortured, starved, raped or simply disappear.
Israel quickly expelled these women without harming them.
So what do other countries do when they intercept suspected saboteurs, provocateurs or spies? In Israel :
* incarcerated : checked
* abused : checked
* tortured : checked
* raped : checked
* shot : checked
See Brian … why not include Israel in your list, it seems very close to the other countries Israel _really_ shares values with !
Could it be because Israel has an edge on that one :
* apartheid : checked
BrianEsker June 5, 2012 at 8:09 pm
“Most folks understand the need for … defensible borders”
Israel has no more right to ‘defensible borders’ than its neighbours. BTW the words ‘defensible borders’ don’t appear in ANY International Law or in any UNSC Resolution. Nor in any Armistice Agreement or Peace Agreement or in any convention.
The term is an Israeli propaganda invention.
So what do other countries do when they intercept suspected saboteurs, provocateurs or spies?”
Oh, so that’s what these women were. You have an inside source…AMAZING!
Brian
I was under the impression that Israel has no borders, but only occupied lands!!
Would you be so kind and show us on an official m,ap of Israel where are the borders?
Brian, Brian. I see you got an A in strawman but there are other logical fallacies that are effective. Overusing a propaganda technique is like over prescribing an antibiotic. People will develop a resistance to it.
So what do other countries do when they intercept suspected saboteurs, provocateurs or spies?
A picture is worth a thousand words. I’ll give you three guesses to tell me the name of the country responsible for the gunshot wounds inflicted on this now-defunct personal laptop computer. Most travelers don’t expect to encounter this sort of procedure at the border crossings here in the civilized world: link to richardsilverstein.com
In my life I have visited several countries where the authorities behaved in a similar way. When interacting with them it was easy to see that their individual self worth, ‘tribal’ acceptance and approval, even survival, depended on their rigid adherence to deep seated (and faulty) beliefs.
It was also clear that it had been that way for generations as all age groups were well represented.
However, not one of these countries was ‘free’ in any way; all were behind the then Iron Curtain and were totally totalitarian in every way. But as history shows, they were still able to change when faced with no other alternative.
My view is that we ought not enable lousy behavior, do all we can to bring change and keep in mind that our governments may not actually be ours.
The reason Israel checks is because the publicity they get from excluding people is nowhere near as bad as if one of these idiotic activists managed to get their fool selves injured or killed at some demonstration.
Ha ha. Yes it’s like magic isn’t it. Those pesky protestors, somehow always managing to “get themselves” killed by Israelis. I wonder how it happens…
So if I understand what you’re saying , Israel would check my private mails and based on what they’d find would expel me in order to protect my little self against the savage Border Police ready to shoot me if I take part in some peaceful demonstration or go to places or talk to people Israel don’t like … That’s probably what you call a thriving democracy!
Let’s see in what other places could this happen ? Hmmmh did I hear you say North Korea, China, Myanmar, Syria … ?
Fredblogs June 5, 2012 at 11:58 pm
The reason Israel checks is because the publicity they get from excluding people is nowhere near as bad as if one of these idiotic activists managed to get their fool selves injured or killed at some demonstration”
By an Israeli bullet, gas canister or having their head smacked by an IDF rifle?
Israel doesn’t even care about the Israeli citizens it assists to settle illegally in “territories occupied”. There GCs are there to protect all civilians. Purposefully committing a war crime on one’s own citizens is kinda twisted don’t you think?
psychopath
The reason Israel checks is because the publicity they get from excluding people is nowhere near as bad as if one of these idiotic activists managed to get their fool selves injured or killed at some demonstration.
If that were really the case, they could simply check the Facebook, Rotter, or YouTube member accounts of their own border police and IDF people. After all the “idiotic activists” aren’t the ones making total asses out of themselves on social media sites or revealing plans to get themselves injured.
On the other hand, the IDF and border police routinely broadcast their plans to commit serious crimes or evidence of past ones on Facebook, Rotter, and YouTube. Most of us here can remember the bad publicity caused by Eden Abergil, Shani Sevilia, Maxim Vinogradov, and the Macarena/belly dancing videos featuring the all singing all dancing IDF occupation force.
I think the important thing about this situation is that it seems to have received some coverage in the main-stream media. Isreal’s behaviour is not going to change until the wider American public is made aware of the atrocities carried out by Isreali’s. I’m not surprised that they have started to abuse Americans, afterall, they’ve persecuted the Palestinians for 50 years and got away with it – so why not pick on someone else.
I think ‘pro-Palestinian’ Americans need to start to focus on the media outlets and journalist who continue to lie and protect Isreal. Some might say that’s ‘attacking the messanger’ but, what does Isreal do to people who tell the truth about Isreal.
I’m absolutely convinced that the Western media’s appeasement of the State of Isreal over a very long period of time, is one of the driving forces behind Islamic extremism.
Israel’s behavior is not going to change ever based on international laws or agreements, UN resolutions, need for U.S. security even need for Israel’s security based on the 67 border. The only way Israel will change their behavior is if aid is threatened and laws and agreements are enforced. We are not talking about a reasonable government or officials.
>The Boston Globe, Seattle Times and many other outlets have published this important story
It’s great that this story is getting as much play as it is, but remember that “published” is an ambiguous term nowadays: the fact that an article appears on a newspaper’s website doesn’t necessarily mean that it was printed in the paper in question. In fact, because cyberspace is effectively unlimited, many papers have feeds that automatically post everything from the AP, at least within certain categories, to their websites. But when it comes to print, where space is finite, and increasingly tight, they are necessarily much more selective, and the ideologies and perceived interests of the publishers and editors come into play. In the case of Israel, we all know what that means
nytimes.com puts a note (in very tiny print) indicating that a story appeared in print at the bottom of its posts of such stories (and when folks here say the Times has published something, I wish they would make clear whether they mean in print or just online). Unfortunately, not all papers provide such info, but generally when you see an AP story at a newspaper website, you can’t assume it appeared in print. In this case, I hope I’m wrong, but I’d be surprised if this story appeared in the print editions of the Boston Globe or the Seattle Times.
Of course, the significance of all this diminishes by the day as paper newspaper circulation declines and people increasingly get their news online. Still, so much appears online that having a story among the hundreds published every day on a newspaper website doesn’t have the same significance – doesn’t reach as many people – as if it had appeared in print.
Nevertheless, I don’t mean to poo-poo this: it’s fabulous and important that Federman and Hadid did this story, and did it so well, and that the AP bosses let it go out to all those websites, and that Gawker, Tablet, etc., have picked it up.
henry, even wapo ran with it but i do not know about their print edition. link to washingtonpost.com
karen platt emailed me last night and told me it was in the print edition of the SF chronicle. but it was the edited version.
I read the print edition of the WaPo virtually every day, and have not seen that story there. I just checked the international news section of today’s print WaPo, and, unless I somehow missed it, it is not there.
If I was Mondoweiss then I wouldn’t be exactly bursting my buttons at the coverage this received…because nearly every MSM I read describe Mondo as a more or less extremist blog that only props up one side of this Israel Palestine issue.
No. The reason this became a wider story is because it details the fact that Israel is using more and more sophisticated and contemporary methods to safeguard its national security. Which you can expect other countries take a lesson from..
Anyone who actually reads the story and looks up the actual character can quickly ascertain that were indeed misrepresenting themselves as “ordinary tourists.”
If anything, it confirms again to a wider audience that all this Israel hate stuff and its proponents are basically fraudulent, racist, and more than occasionally violent.
One more thing. I see that the managers here are horrified to discover that to a wider audience, Mondo has again been typecast as just another pro terror regime mouthpiece. My question is why should they be surprised now?
Brian Esker: because nearly every MSM I read describe Mondo as a more or less extremist blog that only props up one side of this Israel Palestine issue
Yeah, all those links you’ve provided to substantiate your point have me totally convinced!
The problem for you is that WaPo, HuffPo and many other smaller regional papers have reprinted the original AP article by Federman and Hadid which does not characterise MW as an extremist blog. Fox news (as reported in a comment above) reported MW as a left-wing blog. And btw, links below.
link to washingtonpost.com
link to huffingtonpost.com
Check out these google links:
link to news.google.com
for just how many media outlets have reprinted the AP story.
Inanna, upthread he claimed Mondoweiss is nearly always described in the MSM as being virulently biased and when i challenged him to provide a source he didn’t because he couldn’t.
i cannot recall reading even one msm article describing mondoweiss as he portrays. not one. unless he fantasizes dailykos as msm.
he’s just jealous, he can’t stand there’s not even one msm article to support his allegation.
Fox news described Mondo as ‘left wing”…if any msm was going to call MW anti Israel or anti semitic is would be Fox.
The only place I have ever seen MW refered to as anti Israel or anti semitic is DKos by the Shalom crowd.
The lack of integrity at DKos is why I get disheartened whenever I see them listed on a progressive/liberal blogroll. Telling only partial truths means that agenda driven issues are allowed to trump truth and the facts. The Shalom crowd there has pretty much free reign to make their gatekeeping as heavy-handed as they want.
Eff them. In retrospect I’m glad I never sent them a nickel.
Annie, it’s either a complete lack of shame about lying outright or it’s complete stupidity. Neither of these is flattering to the hasbarists.
Annie, it’s either a complete lack of shame about lying outright or it’s complete stupidity.
I’d say its both.
You can find an occasional nasty comment at MW (or in the past you could–I don’t read the comments section that thoroughly anymore), but the fact is that if you go to the comment section of a liberal Zionist blog like Open Zion or Dan Flescher’s (which seems to have gone silent) or any mainstream blog or newspaper where the I/P conflict comes up you will find a fair number of comments by anti-Palestinian, anti-Muslim, or anti-Arab bigots with an extremely one-sided view of the conflict. It’s just part of the normal background. Someday, sooner or later, there will be a fair solution to the I/P conflict and people will look back at how mainstream the anti-Palestinian bias was with the same mixture of condescension and disgust that we tend to feel when we read white 19th century Americans discussing the slavery issue. “How could people who thought of themselves as civilized or liberal be such bigots?”, they will think.
Hopefully this will be sooner rather than later.
>> … it confirms again to a wider audience that all this Israel hate stuff and its proponents are basically fraudulent, racist, and more than occasionally violent.
I love it when people who support justice, democracy, equality and human rights are labelled racist by people who advocate for and defend an oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist state born of terrorism and ethnic cleansing and engaged in a 60+ years, ON-GOING and OFFENSIVE (i.e., not defensive) campaign of aggression, oppression, theft, colonization, destruction and murder.
Links please, BrianEsker, to support your claim.
A little more play for this story: Dore Stein, host of Tangents, a world music/fusion program on KALW-FM in San Francisco, just read excerpts (with credit to Phil and MW) from the original post here about Sandra Tamari during “Gaza Corner,” a segment about Palestine and related issues he’s done at 11 p.m. every Saturday since the Israelis attacked the flotilla in 2010. He’s also reposted the article, complete with the lovely picture of Ms. Tamari and Rabbi Lynn Gottlieb, at the show’s website.