The act of Palestinian activists covering their faces during anti-Israeli occupation rallies is an old practice that spans decades. The masking of the face, often by keffiyehs – traditional Palestinian scarves that grew to symbolize Palestinian resistance – is far from being a fashion statement. Instead, it is a survival technique, without it, activists are likely to be arrested in subsequent nightly raids; at times, even assassinated.
In the past, Israel used basic technologies to identify Palestinians who take part in protests and mobilize the people in various popular activities. TV news footage or newspaper photos were thoroughly deciphered, often with the help of Israel’s collaborators in the occupied Palestinian territory, and the so-called culprits would be identified, summoned to meet Shin Bet intelligence officers or arrested from their homes.
(Photo: Annelies Keuleers)
That old technique was eventually replaced by more advanced technology, countless images transmitted directly through Israeli drones – the flagship of Israel’s “security industry”. Thousands of Palestinians were detained and hundreds were assassinated in recent years as a result of drones data, analyzed through Israel’s burgeoning facial recognition software.
If, in the past, Palestinian activists were keen on keeping their identity hidden, now they have much more compelling reasons to ensure the complete secrecy of their work. Considering the information sharing between the Israeli army and illegal Jewish settlers and their armed militias in the occupied West Bank, Palestinians face the double threat of being targeted by armed settlers as well as by Israeli soldiers.
True, when it comes to Israel, such a grim reality is hardly surprising. But what is truly disturbing is the direct involvement of international corporate giants, the likes of Microsoft, in facilitating the work of the Israeli military, whose sole aim is to crush any form of dissent among Palestinians.
Microsoft prides itself on being a leader in corporate social responsibility (CSR), emphasizing that “privacy (is) a fundamental human right.”
The Washington-State based software giant dedicates much attention, at least on paper, to the subject of human rights. “Microsoft is committed to respecting human rights,” Microsoft Global Human Rights Statement asserts. “We do this by harnessing the beneficial power of technology to help realize and sustain human rights everywhere.”
In practice, however, Microsoft’s words are hardly in line with its action, at least not when its human rights maxims are applied to occupied and besieged Palestinians.
This story shows that ethical principles are fundamentally meaningless if they exist in the abstract. It boils down ot whether Microsoft considers Palestinians to have democratic freedoms that are being infringed by Israeli military surveillance https://t.co/pIi8zscga2
— Olivia Solon (@oliviasolon) October 28, 2019
Writing for the NBC news on October 27, Olivia Solon reported on Microsoft funding of the Israeli firm, AnyVision, which uses facial recognition “to secretly watch West Bank Palestinians.”
Through its venture capital arm M12, Microsoft has reportedly invested $78 million in the Israeli startup company that “uses facial recognition to surveil Palestinians throughout the West Bank, in spite of the tech giant’s public pledge to avoid using the technology if it encroaches on democratic freedoms.”
AnyVision had developed an “advanced tactical surveillance” software system, dubbed “Better Tomorrow” that, according to a joint NBC-Haaretz investigation, “lets customers identify individuals and objects in any live camera feed, such as a security camera or smartphone, and then track targets as they move between different feeds.”
As disquieting as “Better Tomorrow’s” mission sounds, it takes on a truly sinister objective in Palestine. “According to five sources familiar with the matter,” wrote Solon, “AnyVision’s technology powers a secret military surveillance project throughout the West Bank.”
“One source said the project is nicknamed ‘Google Ayosh,’ where ‘Ayosh’ means occupied Palestinian territories and ‘Google’ denotes the technology’s ability to search for people.”
Headquartered in Israel, AnyVision has several offices around the world, including the US, the UK and Singapore. Considering the nature of AnyVision’s work, and the intrinsic link between Israel’s technology sector and the country’s military, it should have been assumed that the company’s software is likely used to track down Palestinian dissidents.
In July, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz pointed out that “AnyVision is taking part in two special projects in assisting the Israeli army in the West Bank. One involves a system that it has installed at army checkpoints that thousands of Palestinians pass through each day on their way to work from the West Bank.”
Former AnyVision employees spoke to NBC about their experiences with the company, one even asserting that he/she “saw no evidence that ethical considerations drove any business decisions” at the firm.
The alarming reports invited strong protests by human rights organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
Alas, Microsoft carried on with supporting AnyVision’s work unhindered.
This is not the first time that Microsoft is caught red-handed in its support of the Israeli military or criticized for other unethical practices.
Unlike Facebook, Google and others, who are constantly, albeit deservingly being chastised for violating privacy rules or allowing politics to influence their editorial agenda, Microsoft has been left largely outside the brewing controversies. But, like the rest, Microsoft should be held to account.
In its Human Rights Statement, Microsoft declared its respect for human rights based on international conventions, starting with the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
In occupying and oppressing Palestinians, Israel violates every article of that declaration, starting with Article 1, which states that “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights,” and including Article 3: “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.”
It will take Microsoft more than hyperlinking to a UN document to show true and sincere respect for human rights.
Indeed, for a company that enjoys great popularity throughout the Middle East and in Palestine itself, an inevitable first step towards respecting human rights is to immediately divest from AnyVision, coupled with an apology for all of those who have already paid the price for that ominous Israeli technology.
I have long wanted to know the names and details of the technology companies that undergird Israel’s anti-Palestinian police state. We’re talking about Microsoft here, but there are all sorts of companies behind this.
I believe that the same companies that control the movements of cows in the United States being led to slaughter are used to control the movements of Palestinians at checkpoints, etc. It really doesn’t make sense that it *wouldn’t* be the same companies because it’s the same sort of software or other technology for the same tracking of people/animals, tracking of movements, etc. (Besides software, the actual gates, turnstiles, etc.)
It’s a malicious technological dystopia that the Nazis would have given their eye teeth for. Israel is a sophisticated elaboration of all the abusive mistreatment practiced by Germans against the Jews.
Also, are the same companies that profited off of the Holocaust and the extermination of Jews in the death camps now profiting off of the abuse and attempted destruction of the Palestinians? –Automobile companies, “security” companies, shipping companies, etc.?
And while this last point isn’t necessarily completely related to this, I want to know the fate of the extermination chemical from the Holocaust known as Zyklon B. They say that the exact same thing, or a closely related chemical, is now used as a herbicide in United State agriculture. Is it possible that that would be the infamous “Roundup” herbicide? I think if there is an actual connection between Zyklon B and a herbicide that that should be known.
Shin Bet announced that they had helped prevent 450 terror attacks against Israel last year.
I bet Microsoft sponsored facial recognition software played a role in preventing some of these terrorist attacks.
@Jackdaw
“Shin Bet announced that they had helped prevent 450 terror attacks against Israel last year”
I may announce that I flew to the moon and back last year. Aren`t announcements wonderful.
“…no concern for the safety and well-being of innocent Jews living in Israel”
That is clearly and entirely the Zionist entity’s and the Zionist movement’s responsibility. Inviting people from all over the world to illegally invade a country to which they are not admissible places them, even if civilian, even if “innocent”, in the situation of unprotected persons being accessory to a war crime. So, all innocent invading interlopers anywhere in Palestine are knowingly being placed in harm’s way by the Zionists (innocence is a relative concept, too, as ignorance of the law is not generally accepted as an excuse, but we’ll pass.)
Their plight is made much worse by the unending war of aggression started in 1947 by the newly declared Zionist entity. Palestinians have the inalienable right not only to defend themselves against occupation by all means available, they also have the right to retaliate against all acts of war.
The Jack*$$’ grievances should be properly addressed to the only responsible party, ie the Zionist entity and the world Zionist leadership.
Wow, echinococcus, you might want to get a hold of yourself and try to express opinions that are not entirely off the scale. You justify the killing of any Israeli Jew (man, woman or child), and so you justify criminal behavior. It’s not that you yourself are an evil-doer, but surely something has gone wrong with your sense of balance.
It’s hard to explain to an extremist (even to one such as you who is not at all a part of the conflict in the first place) that there are two sides to every debate. So, because of your strange handicap, let’s assume that the conflict has been defined correctly in your comment, and every Israeli Jew (including a new-born child) is the “enemy” whose death or injury is a “justified” act of self-defence or retaliation. And let’s assume that even the Israelis themselves agree with your point of view, and they see themselves and their children as the “bad guys” in this story. Now comes the hard part, and you might want to sit down before reading the next idea: Even the “bad guys” have the right to live, and they have the right (and duty) to defend their lives.
It should be noted that there are two sides to this conflict. You see the Israeli Jews as “invaders”, but they see themselves as citizens of their state. It’s really not too complicated to follow the logic of others, and after reading a number of times this very simple truth (that the Israeli Jews see themselves as citizens of their state), I have full confidence that you will understand that (1) they’re not going away, (2) they see Israel as their home and (3) they will protect themselves as individuals and as a collective.
You seem to be in quite a fighting mood (well, others are supposed to fight, and you will just be commenting about it). However, there is a heavy price to pay when you go to war, and success is never promised. I would suggest the revolutionary idea of negotiating an end of conflict.