Trending Topics:

Israeli gov’t upholds denying entry to American teacher in Ramallah

Israel/Palestine
on 47 Comments
Nour Joudah

Nour Joudah

In yesterday’s New York Times, Yousef Munayyer slammed the bills in Congress to grant Israeli citizens visa waivers when they visit the U.S., and Munayyer cited Israeli discrimination against Arab-Americans at its borders– specifically, the arbitrary refusal of Israeli authorities to allow Nour Joudah, above, a dedicated young American teacher, to return to her job at the Friends School in Ramallah.

Joudah twice tried to return to Ramallah at the beginning of the year, to resume her classes with ninth graders. She was twice rebuffed. She lost her job, the school had to hire another teacher.

Well, there is news in Joudah’s case: the Israeli Ministry of Interior responded last week to a written “hearing” it agreed to provide her following her appeal of the denial of entry. And the Ministry upheld the denial decision, without addressing any of the lengthy legal and factual claims raised by Joudah, her lawyer reports.

“The denial of entry, which occurred twice as you remember — first at Allenby Bridge Crossing on January 5th and then at Ben Gurion Airport on February 25th — was what  effectively cancelled Nour’s year-long multiple entry visa and we have been challenging that ever since,” says Joudah’s lawyer, Emily Schaeffer.

Schaeffer says Israel also might have a levied a “ban” against Joudah’s future entries, such as the bans on Adam Shapiro and Norman Finkelstein; but they have not been able to establish this issue.

“I am currently requesting that information from the Ministry of Interior. Oftentimes a denial of entry for security reasons or other reasons (such as overstaying a visa) comes with an entry ban of 5 or 10 years, but not always. I have seen many different cases with varying results,” she says. “If we were to successfully reverse the denial of entry, she would be able to come back now or later and there would be no ban because essentially a court would intervene and say this security denial was unreasonable. But Nour has decided that more than entering right now, what is most important to her is her status to enter in the future.”

So Schaeffer and Joudah want to verify the ban issue before they appeal the ministry’s ruling and try to get a court to set the denial aside.
“As far as teaching at Friends…if that opportunity presents itself again one day, sure possibly,” she wrote to me. “Though given the Ministry of Interior upholding my denial, I don’t foresee them granting me another multiple-entry visa to do so. I loved teaching in Palestine, and while initially my fight was surely focused on getting back to my job and students, this has now expanded to an issue of whether I can enter Palestine at all, for a brief visit or otherwise.”

Reporters at the State Department repeatedly asked about Joudah’s denial last March, without getting a substantive answer.

And I asked Emily Schaeffer what the US government had done on behalf of this American citizen.

“I’m not aware of any State Department position,” she said. “But I am aware of Nour’s congresswoman having been in touch with the Israeli Embassy in DC, who were apparently in touch with the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, who recommended that Nour try to enter again, which as you recall was not successful. Of course there has been a lot of noise about the Israeli US visa waiver policy being stalled because of how Israel treats Arab Americans trying to enter the country, so it is possible there were some conversations we’re not aware of.”

Joudah is now working at the Journal of Palestine Studies and considering going back to graduate school. She says: “I’m not done yet with teaching though, and imagine I’ll be back in a high school classroom in one way or another within the next couple of years, either through traditional teaching or guest lectures and mentoring work.”

philweiss
About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

47 Responses

  1. NormanF
    NormanF
    October 29, 2013, 12:47 pm

    A sovereign state is entitled under international law to refuse admission of a foreign national and does not have to give a reason for its denial. Israel did nothing here the world’s other 192 states don’t do.

    • Ecru
      Ecru
      October 29, 2013, 3:21 pm

      Oh the irony of a Zionist citing International Law. You’ve got to laugh.

    • The Hasbara Buster
      The Hasbara Buster
      October 29, 2013, 3:25 pm

      Except that Israel is neogotiating a visa waiver with the US. In such an agreement, you get free entry and you grant free entry.

      By the way, you don’t seem to be showing any solidarity with your fellow American. Or is it that you don’t feel any “fellowness” towards her? If so, why?

      • October 29, 2013, 6:27 pm

        i urge everyone, right now, to hit mycatbirdseat.com, and watch the debate between ken o’keefe and kaplan on syria!
        WOW! ken o’keefe says with controlled rage what nobody has ever so courageously said about israel with such force and power.
        WOW! michael scheurer just pussyfoots around this, like everybody else. america needs o’keefe to be president or somewhere in a very high decision-making position.
        not only is he a phenominally knowledgeable speaker, i just love his rage! watch it now!

      • NickJOCW
        NickJOCW
        October 30, 2013, 7:21 am

        Thanks for that. No wonder they do everything they can to hound PressTV off the satellites.

      • just
        just
        October 29, 2013, 7:48 pm

        Bingo, The Hasbara Buster!

      • NormanF
        NormanF
        October 29, 2013, 8:42 pm

        Hasby,

        Under the agreement, both sides can still refuse to admit each other’s nationals.

        I simply pointed out this is customary international law. There is a reason the US is mum. It might elect to deny admission to a foreign national someday and justifiably doesn’t want to be accused of hypocrisy.

      • The Hasbara Buster
        The Hasbara Buster
        October 30, 2013, 7:25 am

        NormanF,

        Under the agreement, both sides can still refuse to admit each other’s nationals.

        No sir. Under the agreement, Israel can refuse to admit American nationals without giving any reason verifiable by the US. The US is not explicitly granted such an option.

        I simply pointed out this is customary international law. There is a reason the US is mum.

        Agreements between countries are meant to supersede international law. What is being questioned here is that the US is on the verge of entering an agreement with a country that has a record of refusing entry to Americans based on ethnicity.

        And you haven’t answered my question — as an American, you don’t seem to be much outraged that a fellow American was deported for no apparent reason. Why is that? (I do recall, however, that a few years back you were outraged that an Israeli tennis player was not allowed to enter Dubai to participate in a tournament — you didn’t cite the fact that such refusal was legal under international law.)

      • Ellen
        Ellen
        October 30, 2013, 12:09 am

        Hasbara Buster, the bill Israel is trying to get through the Senate via AIPAC and their paid-off stooges does not even require reciprocality. The language of the bill assures Israel does not need to grant free entry. In fact, it was reviewed by Israeli government officials before AIPAC passed it along to Senate represenatatives. This lack of complete reciprocality would be a first.

        Under the bill, Israelis would be granted automatic visas, but this would not be the case for US citizens, US citizens would be subjected to security reviews.

        All Israel has to do to comply is declare a “fair” proceedure and ifentry were denied, that there is a security issue. But that is it. Of course that is absurd. Who is going to monitor that? The State Dept? A new agency? As if there would be enforcement?

        Barbara Boxer and the Christian Zionist Israeli-Firster, Roy Blount introduced the bill. Their phones should be swamped with outrage.

      • Ellen
        Ellen
        October 30, 2013, 12:27 am

        Here is the AIPAC report on their bill submitted to the zuS Congress and Senate on behalf of the Israeli government:

        http://www.aipac.org/~/media/Publications/Policy%20and%20Politics/AIPAC%20Analyses/Bill%20Summaries/2013/Bill%20Summary%20Strategic%20Partnership%20Act.pdf

        Note the Orwellian language.

        And here is an update of the legislative status:

        http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.938:

    • seafoid
      seafoid
      October 29, 2013, 3:28 pm

      Norman, habibi

      Ramallah is not in Israel. Neither is your settlement. Israel has no sovereignty in the West Bank.

      • OlegR
        OlegR
        October 29, 2013, 6:09 pm

        A pity then that she tries to enter Ramallah through Israel .

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        October 29, 2013, 6:18 pm

        “A pity then that she tries to enter Ramallah through Israel”

        No, the pity is that you demons are occupying the West Bank.

      • Bumblebye
        Bumblebye
        October 29, 2013, 7:44 pm

        OgleR
        You get the booby prize. First attempt to reach her place of employment was at Allenby via JORDAN.
        So, kindly explain by WHAT RIGHT ziotroopers on that entry point are A) doing there in the first place and B) have to deny entry to people who would be welcomed in Palestine, by Palestinians and have the proof.

      • just
        just
        October 29, 2013, 7:54 pm

        I am not entirely sure that he and his buddies have an affinity nor an aptitude for “reading comprehension”. Theirs is a strictured ideology that squeezes all of their senses, cuts off all flow of blood, 02, thought, honest self-examination, truth or justice.

        Self-serving thieves without a conscience.

      • Shingo
        Shingo
        October 30, 2013, 1:45 am

        A pity then that she tries to enter Ramallah through Israel .

        It’s a pitty that fascist apartheid Israel gives her no choice.

      • NormanF
        NormanF
        October 29, 2013, 8:45 pm

        But the Jordan border crossing and Ben Gurion airport are nowhere near Ramallah. She has to deal with Israeli border control. And they have the right to decide if she can get in. If not – as in this case, tough luck. There exists no entitlement to enter any country without its consent.

      • Sammar
        Sammar
        October 30, 2013, 3:02 am

        Norman,

        at the King Hussein Border crossing from Jordan ( called Allenby Bridge by Israel) one enters occupied Palestine, not Israel. Since Israel occupies the WB illegally, one does have to deal with Israeli border control. But they are denying legal entry into a country they illegally occupy.

      • Shingo
        Shingo
        October 30, 2013, 3:03 am

        But the Jordan border crossing and Ben Gurion airport are nowhere near Ramallah. She has to deal with Israeli border control. And they have the right to decide if she can get in.

        Again, that’s because Israel is illegally occupying the West Bank and controlling the entry points. They have no right to block entry and they have no authority to demand consent.

      • Bumblebye
        Bumblebye
        October 30, 2013, 10:25 am

        AbNormal
        Nour HAS the consent of PALESTINE to enter there and she has the employment there – as a teacher. WHY should she need the consent of ISrael on top of that??

      • The Hasbara Buster
        The Hasbara Buster
        October 30, 2013, 1:42 pm

        NormanF:

        She has to deal with Israeli border control. And they have the right to decide if she can get in. If not – as in this case, tough luck.

        When Dubai banned the Israeli representative at the FIAT/IFTA conference earlier this year, this is what you had to say:

        Avatar
        NormanF
        • 2 months ago

        In other words, FIAT/IFTA has decreed “no dogs or Jews allowed.”

        And the Jew-hating Arabs of Dubai are happy!

        “Jew-hating Arabs?” Sorry, no! It was just a case of “tough luck”!

    • Krauss
      Krauss
      October 29, 2013, 3:29 pm

      You’re 100% correct that Israel can do what it wants.

      If it wishes to discriminate on the basis of race and religion, it can. After all, considering it is a de facto Apartheid state, should we be surprised?

      But Norman, have you read the article? The issue is not what the Apartheid state does – which doesn’t require much guessing – but rather that a democracy like the United States would let it pass and allow Israelis treatment to all its citizens which isn’t reciprocated in return, in large part because of pressure from AIPAC and other elements of the fifth column that only has one agenda: the Israeli agenda.

      That’s the issue.

    • justicewillprevail
      justicewillprevail
      October 29, 2013, 3:46 pm

      No other of the 192 states you try and hide behind control another people’s territory with such vicious determination to control every aspect of those people’s lives, including their entry and exit and who may visit them. A ‘sovereign state’, such a quaint, pompous choice of name, has internationally recognised borders and obligations which are agreed under international conventions. Israel flouts all of these requirements, and has no right to dictate who may go to Ramallah or anywhere else.

      • NormanF
        NormanF
        October 29, 2013, 8:48 pm

        Sorry, but there are no rights to pass through one state to travel to a third. Again, a state can refuse passage through its territory to a third country without having to give a reason.

      • Sammar
        Sammar
        October 30, 2013, 3:04 am

        Norman,

        AGAIN – at the Jordanian border crossing one does not enter Israel, one enters occupied Palestine.

      • justicewillprevail
        justicewillprevail
        October 30, 2013, 10:26 am

        Disingenuous and dishonest. They are not separate states, thanks to the israeli occupation and control over Palestine and all movement without and within. Try as you might to normalise it, and airily pretend that other states do this, is a lie.

    • Danaa
      Danaa
      October 30, 2013, 12:06 am

      Norman F, except that Israel IS NOT a sovereign state, except on paper and to a few deluded Israeli citizens (+ their hypocritical American cohorts).. It is a client state of the US, that thinks it found a way to get away with behaving like a really bad vassal. If history is any guide though, one of these days, the empire will have had enough. But the violations and nose thumbing were so egregious that once the gates open, the resentments and barely suppressed fury – felt by just about anyone in the US government (well, except the fifth column, like Dennis Rose) – will be something to behold.

      Of course, Israel knows that, which is why it is collecting intelligence on just about everyone in the US government, and congress, as fast as it can. Not very hard with those NSA back door – or is it the front door through Narus, Verint and that other company that shall not be named?

      But nothing lasts forever, not even Chutzpah. The more the arrogant rise, the harder they fall – i think it says that in the bible somewhere.

      • MahaneYehude1
        MahaneYehude1
        October 30, 2013, 8:36 am

        @Danaa: “But nothing lasts forever, not even Chutzpah. The more the arrogant rise, the harder they fall” – Correct!!!

    • Shingo
      Shingo
      October 30, 2013, 1:43 am

      A sovereign state is entitled under international law to refuse admission of a foreign national and does not have to give a reason for its denial.

      Ramallah is not sovereign Israeli territory. In fact, it is the Israelis who are the foreign nationals.

      Israel did nothing here the world’s other 192 states don’t do.

      Rubbish. None of the other states deny entry of people into other states.

  2. Nevada Ned
    Nevada Ned
    October 29, 2013, 4:07 pm

    Looks as if Israel is preparing to treat the West Bank they way they’re now treating Gaza.

  3. Liz18
    Liz18
    October 29, 2013, 4:08 pm

    Norman,
    That’s not the point.

    • NormanF
      NormanF
      October 29, 2013, 8:50 pm

      If Israel was acting out of the norm, I would agree and if the rest of the world elects to give up control of their borders, Israel should follow suit.

      • talknic
        talknic
        October 30, 2013, 3:28 am

        @ NormanF “If Israel was acting out of the norm”

        It IS acting outside the norm. I’ve never been stopped anywhere in the world from traveling to one country via another. Israel however, controls who goes in and out of Palestine by an occupation it refuses to end.

        ” if the rest of the world elects to give up control of their borders, Israel should follow suit.”

        What a stupid statement. No one is asking Israel to give up controlling Israel’s borders.

        Some people will say anything, no matter how idiotic

  4. amigo
    amigo
    October 29, 2013, 5:16 pm

    ” Israel did nothing here the world’s other 192 states don’t do.” nf

    Norman , lets make a deal .

    Show me proof that Ramallah is in Israel then we will buy your claim that it does no different than 192 other countries do.

    • Mike_Konrad
      Mike_Konrad
      October 29, 2013, 7:54 pm

      Norman , lets make a deal .

      Show me proof that Ramallah is in Israel then we will buy your claim that it does no different than 192 other countries do.

      The standard answer is:

      San Remo 1920 borders
      Levy Report 2012

      Israel complicated the issue by not annexing the area because it does not want to enfranchise the Palestinians on it.

      • talknic
        talknic
        October 30, 2013, 3:59 am

        Mike_Konrad //Show me proof that Ramallah is in Israel then we will buy your claim that it does no different than 192 other countries do//

        “The standard answer is:

        San Remo 1920 borders

        Strange the LoN Mandate for Palestine (1922) Article 7 tells us Jews could attain Palestinian citizenship. Not Israeli citizenship.

        “Levy Report 2012”

        Uh huh.. Then…

        “Israel complicated the issue by not annexing the area”

        Not annexed to Israeli = it isn’t Israeli. You silly silly person. The acquisition of territory by war, ANY war, is inadmissible/illegal http://pages.citebite.com/y1f0t4q1v4son

      • Shingo
        Shingo
        October 30, 2013, 4:20 am

        San Remo 1920 borders
        Levy Report 2012

        San Remo 1920 borders had nothing to do with Israel (Israel was not even conceived) nor a Jewish state.

        Fail!!

        The Levy Report is based on the failed argument Dr Alan Baker presented to the ICJ, which was rejected by all 15 justices. In fact, the Levy Report does not even concur with San Remo.

        In fact, the Levy Report was such a dog that not even the right wing Likud government would touch it

        Fail again!!

      • amigo
        amigo
        October 30, 2013, 6:31 am

        mk The standard answer is:

        San Remo 1920 borders
        Levy Report 2012

        Yep, that is the standard answer from zionutters.

        Golda Meir,s standard answer was “There are no Palestinians”.

        You both have dumb answers.

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        October 30, 2013, 9:15 am

        Mike_Konrad says: “The standard answer is:

        San Remo 1920 borders
        Levy Report 2012

        Israel complicated the issue by not annexing the area because it does not want to enfranchise the Palestinians on it.”

        We all know Hasbara’s “standard answers”. But we all know that none of them make any legal sense. Especially not if you admit that it would be an annexation, which would be beligerent and therefore illegal. So why don’t you use your brain instead of “standard answers”? (I have a clue.)

    • NormanF
      NormanF
      October 29, 2013, 8:52 pm

      Under the Oslo accords, Israel retains overriding responsibility for security and border affairs.

      If the Arabs have a problem with it, no one forced them to accept autonomy from Israel.

      • Shingo
        Shingo
        October 30, 2013, 3:15 am

        Under the Oslo accords, Israel retains overriding responsibility for security and border affairs.

        The Oslo accords expired after 5 years. Israel occupied the West Bank illegally.

        What’s more, even under the Oslo accord, Ramallah was not part of Israel.

        If the Arabs have a problem with it, no one forced them to accept autonomy from Israel.

        Israel has. They have no authority to be in the occupied territories.

      • talknic
        talknic
        October 30, 2013, 4:02 am

        NormanF “Under the Oslo accords, Israel retains overriding responsibility for security and border affairs”

        As the Occupying Power

        “If the Arabs have a problem with it, no one forced them to accept autonomy from Israel”

        Israel holds them under MILITARY Occupation = a gun to their head

        Like all zionnutters you’ll say anything, no matter how wrong or stupid

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        October 30, 2013, 9:17 am

        Yes, NormanF. Nobody “forced” the Vichy goverment to accept “autonomy”, too. Oh, you’re so educated.

  5. bilal a
    bilal a
    October 29, 2013, 5:36 pm

    America and Fox News’ most illustrious neoconservative Charles Krauthammer won’t have any problems getting into Israel again, having familial and rabbinic ties:
    His father was an attendee at the first zionist congresses in europe, and moving between france, new york, switzerland, and montreal he may have been in the early Irgun, as a religious zionist movement at the seminal conferences? I can find no reference to Krauthammer’s fathers birthplace or name.
    —–

    Photo Marcel [brother of Charles] Krauthammer and Israeli cousin Shlomik
    Marcel Krauthammer, Rabbi Aharon Simkin
    Young Israel of Northridge
    Marcel celebrates Siyyum after 14 years of Gemara study 3.27.2002
    Marcel & teacher R. Nachum Sauer
    © Joy Krauthammer

    http://marcel-my-husband.blogspot.com/

    M. Krauthammer’s Rabbi Aharon Simkin is an apocalytptic zionist:

    in 1948, 1967 Hashem made modern miracles for us in eretz yisrael. And again in 1973. If we want to see more such miracles in 5766 and beyond which will be comparable to the 10 makot in Egypt and the splitting of the sea, it is up to us to do our part.
    Let us hasten the end of galut, participate in the beginning of the final 4th geulah by doing better at keeping the mitzvos, including returning home to live as free and proud Jews in our own land of Israel.
    Please enjoy a Chag Kasher Ve-Sameach,
    Rav Aharon Simkin
    http://www.yion.org/rabbi_p1.php

    Rabbi Nachum Sauer is the Rosh Kollel of the Yeshiva of Los Angeles. .. an alumnus of the Mirrer Yeshiva in Jerusalem.
    http://www.ishiur.com/Speakers/P1/Sauer-Nachum-14.html

    Krauthammer’s family also instilled a strong love of Israel. His father was in the Mizrachi movement. “He was at a Zionist meeting in Switzerland in 1939 when the war broke out,” Krauthammer said.
    http://www.mitchellbard.com/articles/kraut.html

    In August 1933 a “Supervisory Committee” for the Irgun was established, which included … Rabbi Meir Bar Ilan (of the Mizrachi Party)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irgun

  6. Henry Norr
    Henry Norr
    October 29, 2013, 6:20 pm

    >>In yesterday’s New York Times, Yousef Munayyer slammed the bills
    >>in Congress to grant Israeli citizens visa waivers when they visit the U.S.

    Did Munayyer’s piece actually appear in the paper NYT? It’s posted at nytimes.com, but the fine print at the bottom there mentions only the International New York Times (formerly the International Herald Tribune). Generally speaking, the Times lets more criticism of Israel appear on the website and in the international paper than in the U.S. print editions.

  7. DICKERSON3870
    DICKERSON3870
    October 29, 2013, 7:21 pm

    RE: “Munayyer cited Israeli discrimination against Arab-Americans at its borders– specifically, the arbitrary refusal of Israeli authorities to allow Nour Joudah, above, a dedicated young American teacher, to return to her job at the Friends School in Ramallah.” ~ Weiss

    MY COMMENT: I wonder if AIPAC and/or the Anti-Defamation League was involved in Israel’s decision to deny entry to Ms. Joudah. Apparently, the AIPAC and ADL sometimes passe along information on wrong-thinking Americans to the Israelis*, and the ADL has always had a burr under its saddle for the Friends (Quakers)**. In fact, it wouldn’t surprise me if the ADL would give its far-rightmost nut to get back at the Friends (Quakers).

    * SEE – “The Strange History of the Anti-Defamation League:
    ADL Spies”
    , by Jeffrey Blankfort, Counterpunch, 6/12/13

    [EXCERPTS] . . . What is definitely in order is a reminder that this year also marks the 20th anniversary of the exposure of a nation-wide spying operation run by the ADL that went back at least five decades.
    In January, 1993, San Francisco newspapers reported that the city’s police department had raided the ADL’s Northern California office and discovered it was keeping files on more than 600 largely liberal civic organizations and over 10,000 individuals whose interests and activities included but also went far beyond those of the Arab-American community.

    After examining the sequestered files, San Francisco police inspector Ron Roth, estimated that 75% of the information had been illegally obtained and by November, District Attorney Arlo Smith appeared to be on the verge of indicting the ADL for numerous violations of state and city codes. . .
    . . . In California, the ADL’s secret spying and file keeping was mainly the provenance of Roy Bullock, a beefy San Francisco weight-lifter, who went by the code name, “Cal,” and reported to the ADL’s chief spymaster in New York, the now deceased Irwin Suall.
    To keep the relationship out of public as well as government eyes, Bullock was paid through a cut-out in Beverly Hills, Bruce Hochman, a lawyer and member of the ADL’s board, also now deceased.
    As late as July 19, 1992, Suall had described Bullock as “our Number One fact finder” whose assignments included, in addition to his duties in California, attending and monitoring conferences and conventions of Arab-Americans across the country. . .
    . . . At the time, Bullock was receiving close to $25,000 a year for monitoring what he and the ADL considered “antidemocratic” organizations and individuals and he had been doing it for 40 years. . .

    ENTIRE ARTICLE – http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/06/12/adl-spies/

    ** JUST A SMALL SAMPLING:
    • Joint Ajcongress, ADL Study Charges Quaker Report on Mideast is Biased – http://www.jta.org/1971/08/11/archive/joint-ajcongress-adl-study-charges-quaker-report-on-mideast-is-biased
    • NY high school students visit Western Wall, Israel Museum, and AJC, but Foxman blasts them for daring to meet Palestinians – http://mondoweiss.net/2012/04/ny-school-visits-western-wall-israel-museum-and-ajc-but-foxman-blasts-them-because-they-dared-to-meet-palestinians.html
    • ADL: Religious Groups’ Plan to Break Bread with Ahmadinejad is a “Betrayal” – http://www.jpost.com/LandedPages/PrintArticle.aspx?id=53468
    • ADL blasts US churches’ praise of Ahmadinejad – http://www.jpost.com/LandedPages/PrintArticle.aspx?id=53468
    • Anti-Israel Boycott Training Potentially Illegal – http://freebeacon.com/anti-israel-boycott-training-potentially-illegal/

    • DICKERSON3870
      DICKERSON3870
      October 29, 2013, 7:40 pm

      P.S. RE: “Apparently, the AIPAC and ADL sometimes passe along information on wrong-thinking Americans to the Israelis . . .” – me (from above)

      ANOTHER EXCERPT FROM THE BLANKFORT ARTICLE:

      . . . Our suit charged the ADL with violating a narrow privacy provision of California state law,1798.53, which holds that “Any person, other than an employee of the state or of a local government agency…..who intentionally discloses information, not otherwise public, which they know or should reasonably know was obtained from personal information maintained by a state agency or from ‘records’
      … maintained by a federal government agency, shall be subject to a civil action, for invasion of privacy, by the individual to whom the information pertains.”
      In this instance, the 9th District Court of California had determined that information on Zeltzer and me had been provided [by the ADL] to the governments of Israel and South Africa and that information on Annie Poirier had been given to South Africa. . .

      SOURCE – http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/06/12/adl-spies/

Leave a Reply