8 may 2019
The mother of the martyr Yasser Murtaja, a cameraman killed by Israeli military near the Gaza borders while covering March of Return events with his camera, addressed a message to Madonna for agreeing to perform in Eurovision in Tel Aviv later this month.
The text of the message follows:
Ms. Madonna
You certainly do not know me, but you know my son Yasser Murtaja, and you certainly heard about him in the news. Maybe you did not believe the story, till today I do not believe it too although a year passed since he was killed in a heartless and inhumane way.
My son was a photographer who dreamed of flying with his dreams away, like a bird, carrying his camera to document the Israeli violations against unarmed civilians in the Gaza Strip.
He used his camera in three wars, in which Israel crushed Gaza for ten years. He had the scoop to depict the destruction, to lift the children out of the rubble, and to help the wounded and the orphans, for he had so affectionate and compassionate heart.
On Friday afternoon, April 7, 2018, Yasser, like other journalists, was carrying his camera and wearing his uniform. Israel knew full well that he was a cameraman standing there to pick up the picture. Nevertheless, its snipers shot him without mercy with an explosive bullet that penetrated his body crushing his bones and his dreams.
Have you ever heard about the explosive bullets? It is internationally prohibited bullets that penetrate the body and run through the bowels and does not come out until death is certain. This is what Israel did to my son.
I will tell you about Yasser, my eldest son, who dreamed of traveling to many countries, to show the photos he shot in exhibitions to the world. He dreamed of being a messenger of sad Gaza; his films were broadcast on famous TV channels even after his death.
You can imagine before you arrive in Israel, how can the heart of a mother feel after losing her eldest son at an early age just because Israel wanted to end his life. Imagine how this crime left behind a baby, a young wife who dreamed of being beside Yasser, and a cold house devoid of his voice and laughter.
You should read this message sent by the heart of a mother like you. You know the meaning of having a child. You know how to have a dream for which you live for, and a joy that you seek to achieve, and then this joy is killed quickly.
Yasser was a modest young man, peaceful, unarmed, carrying his camera to convey to the world the real picture of Israel on the borders of Gaza while its forces assassinate the dreams of children and young people. It killed the picture conveyed by Yasser, a picture of Palestinians demanding their rights, which were stolen by Israel.
My son simply did not want to die, he was looking for life. He loved his job, he wanted to raise his son. He loved his country, and he did not want to leave me.
Ms. Madonna, do you know why I write to you now, because you decided to sing on the scene of the murderer and call for love and peace in a country that does not know the true meaning of peace and knows only the language of murder and war? Can your songs restore my son's right to life?
Khairia Murtaja
7/5/2019
The text of the message follows:
Ms. Madonna
You certainly do not know me, but you know my son Yasser Murtaja, and you certainly heard about him in the news. Maybe you did not believe the story, till today I do not believe it too although a year passed since he was killed in a heartless and inhumane way.
My son was a photographer who dreamed of flying with his dreams away, like a bird, carrying his camera to document the Israeli violations against unarmed civilians in the Gaza Strip.
He used his camera in three wars, in which Israel crushed Gaza for ten years. He had the scoop to depict the destruction, to lift the children out of the rubble, and to help the wounded and the orphans, for he had so affectionate and compassionate heart.
On Friday afternoon, April 7, 2018, Yasser, like other journalists, was carrying his camera and wearing his uniform. Israel knew full well that he was a cameraman standing there to pick up the picture. Nevertheless, its snipers shot him without mercy with an explosive bullet that penetrated his body crushing his bones and his dreams.
Have you ever heard about the explosive bullets? It is internationally prohibited bullets that penetrate the body and run through the bowels and does not come out until death is certain. This is what Israel did to my son.
I will tell you about Yasser, my eldest son, who dreamed of traveling to many countries, to show the photos he shot in exhibitions to the world. He dreamed of being a messenger of sad Gaza; his films were broadcast on famous TV channels even after his death.
You can imagine before you arrive in Israel, how can the heart of a mother feel after losing her eldest son at an early age just because Israel wanted to end his life. Imagine how this crime left behind a baby, a young wife who dreamed of being beside Yasser, and a cold house devoid of his voice and laughter.
You should read this message sent by the heart of a mother like you. You know the meaning of having a child. You know how to have a dream for which you live for, and a joy that you seek to achieve, and then this joy is killed quickly.
Yasser was a modest young man, peaceful, unarmed, carrying his camera to convey to the world the real picture of Israel on the borders of Gaza while its forces assassinate the dreams of children and young people. It killed the picture conveyed by Yasser, a picture of Palestinians demanding their rights, which were stolen by Israel.
My son simply did not want to die, he was looking for life. He loved his job, he wanted to raise his son. He loved his country, and he did not want to leave me.
Ms. Madonna, do you know why I write to you now, because you decided to sing on the scene of the murderer and call for love and peace in a country that does not know the true meaning of peace and knows only the language of murder and war? Can your songs restore my son's right to life?
Khairia Murtaja
7/5/2019
30 apr 2019
|
|
Last year, AirBnB declared that it would withdraw listings on its site from Israeli settlers based in Jew-only colonies in the West Bank
Last year, AirBnB declared that it would withdraw listings on its site from Israeli settlers based in Jew-only colonies in the West Bank. All such colonial-settlements are illegal under international law. The move came after years of campaigning by Palestine solidarity activists. The effect of their efforts was acknowledged by AirBnB when the property lettings company announced the initial withdrawal. However, under pressure, AirBnB has now capitulated to demands from Israel and its supporters to reverse the move. Part of this pressure was a lawsuit by Israeli and Israeli-American settlers and supporters against the company in a US court. READ: Airbnb reneges on decision to delist West Bank settlement properties As my colleague at The Electronic Intifada, Nora Barrows-Friedman reported in April, Amnesty International called this U-turn a “reprehensible and cowardly move that will be another devastating blow for the human rights of Palestinians.” The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign calling on AirBnB to drop its Israeli settlement listings is not over, though. Palestinians directly dispossessed and discriminated against by the colonists listing their settlement properties on AirBnB launched a countersuit some months ago. In the wake of AirBnB’s capitulation, they have confirmed that their countersuit against the settlers will be going ahead. “Although I am disappointed by AirBnB’s about-turn, we have always known that the road to justice would be a long one,” said Randa Wahbe, one of the Palestinians lodging the countersuit. “We laid out the settlements’ discriminatory realities for the court and how they impact our daily lives. I hope the court will allow us to proceed with our claims.” As a Palestinian resident of the West Bank, she is not able to enter Jerusalem or to enter Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories. Although she also has US citizenship, the racist nature of Zionism dictates that, as a Palestinian, she is not able to rent from AirBnB’s Israeli settlement listings in the West Bank. |
Wahbe has spoken out on a video made by the Centre for Constitutional Rights (CCR), the activist law firm which filed the countersuit in a US court.
“[Israel’s racist restrictions] have hindered me from being able to visit my father’s side of the family in East Jerusalem, from being able to conduct my PhD research, and most importantly from getting to know where I am from,” she explained. “It pains me to think of how many Palestinians have been killed or arrested by the Israeli army to help facilitate this continued Jewish-only settlement expansion.”
Another of the suit’s intervenors is the local council of the Palestinian village of Jalud, near Nablus, in the northern West Bank. The village has lost 80 per cent of its land to nearby settlements.
READ: Israel advances 3,600 new settlement units deep in West Bank
Some of these settlements, known as “outposts”, are illegal even under Israeli law, yet are still protected by the Israeli military. What’s more, one of these illegal outposts contains a property that is listed on AirBnB. You can see it in the video at the top of this article, where it is listed as a home in “Biblical Shiloh, Israel”.
As the Palestinian head of the village’s council says, “It is immensely painful to know that those who own the land can’t walk on it or reach it, but can only view it on the internet.”
Another plaintiff of the countersuit is the municipality of ‘Anata, a Palestinian town near Jerusalem, whose land has been stolen by several nearby Israeli settlements.
As a resident of the town says in this video, “We are prohibited from living on these lands, but [Jewish] people can come from Russia, Poland and similar places, they can build housing units here, and then advertise it online for rent! This means that to them, this is an investment venture, not out of a need that they have.”
Ironically, the settlers are claiming in their suit that AirBnB discriminated against them when the company decided to remove settlement properties from its platform. As the CCR explains, “The plaintiffs are in effect claiming that Airbnb is discriminating against settlers’ ability to dispossess Palestinians and exclude them from their own land.”
This is the first time that Palestinians are challenging the settlers living directly on their land, which has been stolen from them, in a US court. There have been other similar cases, but this one has been launched by the Palestinians directly affected by these specific settlements. As such, this will be an important case to watch.
Stay tuned.
“[Israel’s racist restrictions] have hindered me from being able to visit my father’s side of the family in East Jerusalem, from being able to conduct my PhD research, and most importantly from getting to know where I am from,” she explained. “It pains me to think of how many Palestinians have been killed or arrested by the Israeli army to help facilitate this continued Jewish-only settlement expansion.”
Another of the suit’s intervenors is the local council of the Palestinian village of Jalud, near Nablus, in the northern West Bank. The village has lost 80 per cent of its land to nearby settlements.
READ: Israel advances 3,600 new settlement units deep in West Bank
Some of these settlements, known as “outposts”, are illegal even under Israeli law, yet are still protected by the Israeli military. What’s more, one of these illegal outposts contains a property that is listed on AirBnB. You can see it in the video at the top of this article, where it is listed as a home in “Biblical Shiloh, Israel”.
As the Palestinian head of the village’s council says, “It is immensely painful to know that those who own the land can’t walk on it or reach it, but can only view it on the internet.”
Another plaintiff of the countersuit is the municipality of ‘Anata, a Palestinian town near Jerusalem, whose land has been stolen by several nearby Israeli settlements.
As a resident of the town says in this video, “We are prohibited from living on these lands, but [Jewish] people can come from Russia, Poland and similar places, they can build housing units here, and then advertise it online for rent! This means that to them, this is an investment venture, not out of a need that they have.”
Ironically, the settlers are claiming in their suit that AirBnB discriminated against them when the company decided to remove settlement properties from its platform. As the CCR explains, “The plaintiffs are in effect claiming that Airbnb is discriminating against settlers’ ability to dispossess Palestinians and exclude them from their own land.”
This is the first time that Palestinians are challenging the settlers living directly on their land, which has been stolen from them, in a US court. There have been other similar cases, but this one has been launched by the Palestinians directly affected by these specific settlements. As such, this will be an important case to watch.
Stay tuned.
28 apr 2019
In a major victory for free speech rights, a federal court judge in Texas issued a temporary injunction on Thursday against the state’s 2017 law that requires public employees and companies who contract with the state to certify that they will not engage in a boycott of Israel.
The Texas law is part of a systematic nationwide attempt to stigmatize and outlaw the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) campaign for Palestinian rights in the US.
In his 56-page order [pdf], US District Judge Robert Pitman writes that the law, House Bill 89, “threatens to suppress unpopular ideas” and “manipulate the public debate through coercion rather than persuasion.”
The injunction follows similar orders issued by federal judges against anti-BDS laws in Arizona and Kansas, citing First Amendment violations.
Lawsuits are also pending against anti-BDS laws in Maryland and Arkansas.
In December, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) filed a lawsuit against the state’s anti-BDS law on behalf of Bahia Amawi, a speech pathologist in Texas who refused to sign a contract to renew her job with the Austin public school district.
The contract included a clause that she “does not” and “will not” engage in a boycott of Israel or “otherwise tak[e] any action that is intended to inflict economic harm” on that country.
In response to Amawi’s lawsuit, Texas Governor Greg Abbott tweeted that “Texas stands with Israel. Period.”
State officials then offered to amend the law to block it from applying to individuals, but, according to the Statesman newspaper, Amawi said the amendment would not satisfy the plaintiff’s demands as it would not strike language that stops the government from contracting with companies that refuse to do business with Israel.
Thursday’s injunction “clears the way for Amawi to return to her position teaching 3-, 4- and 5-year-olds,” the Statesman reports.
The attorney general of Texas, CAIR notes, “is no longer permitted to include or enforce ‘No Boycott of Israel’ clauses in any state contract.”
“The First Amendment blocks any effort by state governments or the federal government from forcing their citizens to take sides in the widespread international debate about the relationship between Israel and Palestine,” said CAIR trial attorney Carolyn Homer.
The ruling is “a complete victory for the First Amendment against Governor Abbott’s attempt to suppress the rights of Texans to exercise their constitutional rights,” said Amawi’s lawyer, Gadeir Abbas, who added that it is forever “going to be a stain” on Abbott’s record.
“This victory should send an important warning to federal and state lawmakers across the country who have sought to suppress [the] rights of Americans to engage in the wonderful American tradition of expressing their views via boycott,” Abbas said.
In addition to Amawi’s lawsuit, a separate suit was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of four Texans who were forced under the law to “choose between signing the certification or forgoing professional opportunities and losing income,” according to the ACLU.
They include a freelance writer who lost two contracts with the University of Houston; a doctoral candidate at Rice University who was forced to forfeit payment for judging a debate tournament; a student at Texas State University who lost opportunities to judge high school debate tournaments; and George Hale, a reporter for radio station KETR, who was forced to sign the certification in order to keep his job.
Hale told The Electronic Intifada on Friday that Texas has no right to tell public radio journalists what they can or can’t say about the situation in Palestine.
“I’m relieved that I can finally resume my boycott of companies complicit in Israel’s violation of Palestinian rights without fear of losing my job,” he said.
The ACLU applauded Thursday’s federal court decision as a victory for free speech and said it was not surprising since the right to boycott is “deeply ingrained in American tradition.”
“In its decision the court has affirmed its understanding that this law was intended to chill the expression of personal opinion,” said Terri Burke, executive director of the ACLU in Texas.
“Impermissible purpose”
Judge Pitman’s order states that the plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their claims that the law is unconstitutional because it is “an impermissible content- and viewpoint-based restriction on protected expression.” The order adds that the Texas law “imposes unconstitutional conditions on public employment [and] compels speech for an impermissible purpose.”
He also concludes that the law is too vague to implement. It makes it impossible for state contractors to know whether they could decline to purchase an Israeli product – or a US-made product from a company that does business with Israel’s military – or if they were “obliged to purchase it unless they can justify not doing so for business purposes.”
The plaintiffs “therefore have suffered harm by the enforcement of HB 89 and will continue to suffer harm unless it is enjoined,” the judge adds.
Notably, Pitman references the US Supreme Court’s 1982 decision in a Mississippi case over boycotts organized by Black civil rights activists who refused to buy from stores owned by white merchants in the 1960s, in protest at racist and unequal treatment.
The white merchants sued the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the civil rights group whose members called the boycott, demanding damages for lost earnings.
Mississippi state courts sided with the white merchants, holding the NAACP liable and declaring the boycott illegal.
But the US Supreme Court unanimously overturned these decisions, finding that boycotts called to bring about social and political change enjoy the highest protection of the First Amendment.
In his order, Pitman concludes that the “plaintiffs’ BDS boycotts are inherently expressive conduct,” just as the Mississippi case proved.
“I’m very happy that the judge has decided to support our right to hold our own political beliefs and express them as we see fit,” said John Pluecker, the freelance writer who was one of the plaintiffs in the ACLU lawsuit.
“This ruling goes beyond just the plaintiffs – this law needed to be challenged for everyone. People in Texas need to know that our ability to earn our livelihoods won’t be threatened by the state because of our political positions,” Pluecker added.
Earlier this month, Texas announced that it would pull $72 million in stocks from DNB, a Norwegian financial services agency managing two of the state’s pension funds, over its naming of three Israeli firms as human rights violators.
Thursday’s injunction means that the state may not be compelled to pull the funds from DNB on the grounds that the company has chosen not to do business with the firms, which are engaged in weapons manufacturing and illegal settlement construction in the occupied West Bank.
Meanwhile, civil rights attorneys have said they will continue to challenge the anti-BDS laws which remain on the books.
“Texas cannot suppress boycotts for Palestinian rights just because lawmakers don’t like the message that Palestinians deserve equality,” said Palestine Legal senior staff attorney Liz Jackson. “Neither can Congress, Arkansas, Kansas, Arizona, or any of the 27 states who have tried to restrict our right to boycott.”
“Judge Pitman of the US District Court in Texas got it right: there is no First Amendment exception when it comes to Palestine,” Jackson added.
~Electronic Intifada/Days of Palestine
The Texas law is part of a systematic nationwide attempt to stigmatize and outlaw the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) campaign for Palestinian rights in the US.
In his 56-page order [pdf], US District Judge Robert Pitman writes that the law, House Bill 89, “threatens to suppress unpopular ideas” and “manipulate the public debate through coercion rather than persuasion.”
The injunction follows similar orders issued by federal judges against anti-BDS laws in Arizona and Kansas, citing First Amendment violations.
Lawsuits are also pending against anti-BDS laws in Maryland and Arkansas.
In December, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) filed a lawsuit against the state’s anti-BDS law on behalf of Bahia Amawi, a speech pathologist in Texas who refused to sign a contract to renew her job with the Austin public school district.
The contract included a clause that she “does not” and “will not” engage in a boycott of Israel or “otherwise tak[e] any action that is intended to inflict economic harm” on that country.
In response to Amawi’s lawsuit, Texas Governor Greg Abbott tweeted that “Texas stands with Israel. Period.”
State officials then offered to amend the law to block it from applying to individuals, but, according to the Statesman newspaper, Amawi said the amendment would not satisfy the plaintiff’s demands as it would not strike language that stops the government from contracting with companies that refuse to do business with Israel.
Thursday’s injunction “clears the way for Amawi to return to her position teaching 3-, 4- and 5-year-olds,” the Statesman reports.
The attorney general of Texas, CAIR notes, “is no longer permitted to include or enforce ‘No Boycott of Israel’ clauses in any state contract.”
“The First Amendment blocks any effort by state governments or the federal government from forcing their citizens to take sides in the widespread international debate about the relationship between Israel and Palestine,” said CAIR trial attorney Carolyn Homer.
The ruling is “a complete victory for the First Amendment against Governor Abbott’s attempt to suppress the rights of Texans to exercise their constitutional rights,” said Amawi’s lawyer, Gadeir Abbas, who added that it is forever “going to be a stain” on Abbott’s record.
“This victory should send an important warning to federal and state lawmakers across the country who have sought to suppress [the] rights of Americans to engage in the wonderful American tradition of expressing their views via boycott,” Abbas said.
In addition to Amawi’s lawsuit, a separate suit was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of four Texans who were forced under the law to “choose between signing the certification or forgoing professional opportunities and losing income,” according to the ACLU.
They include a freelance writer who lost two contracts with the University of Houston; a doctoral candidate at Rice University who was forced to forfeit payment for judging a debate tournament; a student at Texas State University who lost opportunities to judge high school debate tournaments; and George Hale, a reporter for radio station KETR, who was forced to sign the certification in order to keep his job.
Hale told The Electronic Intifada on Friday that Texas has no right to tell public radio journalists what they can or can’t say about the situation in Palestine.
“I’m relieved that I can finally resume my boycott of companies complicit in Israel’s violation of Palestinian rights without fear of losing my job,” he said.
The ACLU applauded Thursday’s federal court decision as a victory for free speech and said it was not surprising since the right to boycott is “deeply ingrained in American tradition.”
“In its decision the court has affirmed its understanding that this law was intended to chill the expression of personal opinion,” said Terri Burke, executive director of the ACLU in Texas.
“Impermissible purpose”
Judge Pitman’s order states that the plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their claims that the law is unconstitutional because it is “an impermissible content- and viewpoint-based restriction on protected expression.” The order adds that the Texas law “imposes unconstitutional conditions on public employment [and] compels speech for an impermissible purpose.”
He also concludes that the law is too vague to implement. It makes it impossible for state contractors to know whether they could decline to purchase an Israeli product – or a US-made product from a company that does business with Israel’s military – or if they were “obliged to purchase it unless they can justify not doing so for business purposes.”
The plaintiffs “therefore have suffered harm by the enforcement of HB 89 and will continue to suffer harm unless it is enjoined,” the judge adds.
Notably, Pitman references the US Supreme Court’s 1982 decision in a Mississippi case over boycotts organized by Black civil rights activists who refused to buy from stores owned by white merchants in the 1960s, in protest at racist and unequal treatment.
The white merchants sued the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the civil rights group whose members called the boycott, demanding damages for lost earnings.
Mississippi state courts sided with the white merchants, holding the NAACP liable and declaring the boycott illegal.
But the US Supreme Court unanimously overturned these decisions, finding that boycotts called to bring about social and political change enjoy the highest protection of the First Amendment.
In his order, Pitman concludes that the “plaintiffs’ BDS boycotts are inherently expressive conduct,” just as the Mississippi case proved.
“I’m very happy that the judge has decided to support our right to hold our own political beliefs and express them as we see fit,” said John Pluecker, the freelance writer who was one of the plaintiffs in the ACLU lawsuit.
“This ruling goes beyond just the plaintiffs – this law needed to be challenged for everyone. People in Texas need to know that our ability to earn our livelihoods won’t be threatened by the state because of our political positions,” Pluecker added.
Earlier this month, Texas announced that it would pull $72 million in stocks from DNB, a Norwegian financial services agency managing two of the state’s pension funds, over its naming of three Israeli firms as human rights violators.
Thursday’s injunction means that the state may not be compelled to pull the funds from DNB on the grounds that the company has chosen not to do business with the firms, which are engaged in weapons manufacturing and illegal settlement construction in the occupied West Bank.
Meanwhile, civil rights attorneys have said they will continue to challenge the anti-BDS laws which remain on the books.
“Texas cannot suppress boycotts for Palestinian rights just because lawmakers don’t like the message that Palestinians deserve equality,” said Palestine Legal senior staff attorney Liz Jackson. “Neither can Congress, Arkansas, Kansas, Arizona, or any of the 27 states who have tried to restrict our right to boycott.”
“Judge Pitman of the US District Court in Texas got it right: there is no First Amendment exception when it comes to Palestine,” Jackson added.
~Electronic Intifada/Days of Palestine
The Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI) has called on Iceland’s Eurovision entrant Hatari to withdraw from the contest, held in Tel Aviv next month.
PACBI, a founding member of the Palestinian Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) Movement National Committee, the largest Palestinian civil society coalition, said that “[t]he most meaningful expression of solidarity is to cancel performances in apartheid Israel”.
Hatari have previously said, “If Iceland’s contestant does not use their influence to point out the obvious, the absurdity of frolicking and dancing at the same time as millions live just a few miles away with reduced freedom and constant uncertainty about their own wellbeing and safety, then we have failed. If Iceland’s contestant ignores the fact that the competition is inherently political, he does little to diminish the need for a critical conversation about Israel.”
Alia Malak of PACBI recently told Pinknews, “[t]housands of artists now publicly support the call from Palestinian artists and cultural organisations for the cultural boycott of Israel.”
More than 100,000 people have signed petitions supporting the Palestinian call for the boycott of the contest hosted by Israel, as part of the ongoing BDS movement.
Over 100 LGBTQ+ groups have also joined the campaign, as well as hundreds of artists including former Eurovision contestants, and the 1994 winner for Ireland, Charlie McGettigan.
In March, more than 100 Palestinian artists wrote an open letter appealing to all Eurovision finalists to withdraw, “to avoid participating in Israel’s explicit agenda of using international artists’ appearances to whitewash its crimes against humanity.”
26 Israeli artists also urged Eurovision contestants to cancel, saying in an open letter they “can’t sit silent as our Palestinian counterparts suffer silencing, dehumanization and violence”.
The Palestinian-led BDS movement was founded in 2005 with three aims: the end of Israel’s military occupation, full equality for Palestinians with Israeli citizenship, and the right of return for Palestinian refugees.
PACBI’s full statement to Hatari is below.
“Palestinians are calling on all Eurovision contestants to withdraw from the contest in apartheid Tel Aviv. This includes Iceland’s entrant Hatari, in particular, who are on the record supporting Palestinian rights.
“Artists who insist on crossing the Palestinian boycott picket line, playing Tel Aviv in defiance of our calls, cannot offset the harm they do to our human rights struggle by “balancing” their complicit act with some project with Palestinians.
“Palestinian civil society overwhelmingly rejects this fig-leafing, having learnt from the fight against apartheid in South Africa.
“While we appreciate gestures of solidarity, we cannot accept them when they come with an act that clearly undermines our nonviolent human rights movement. The most meaningful expression of solidarity is to cancel performances in apartheid Israel.
“We appeal to all Palestinian artists to refrain from organizing any activities with artists who violate the guidelines of the cultural boycott of Israel.”
PACBI, a founding member of the Palestinian Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) Movement National Committee, the largest Palestinian civil society coalition, said that “[t]he most meaningful expression of solidarity is to cancel performances in apartheid Israel”.
Hatari have previously said, “If Iceland’s contestant does not use their influence to point out the obvious, the absurdity of frolicking and dancing at the same time as millions live just a few miles away with reduced freedom and constant uncertainty about their own wellbeing and safety, then we have failed. If Iceland’s contestant ignores the fact that the competition is inherently political, he does little to diminish the need for a critical conversation about Israel.”
Alia Malak of PACBI recently told Pinknews, “[t]housands of artists now publicly support the call from Palestinian artists and cultural organisations for the cultural boycott of Israel.”
More than 100,000 people have signed petitions supporting the Palestinian call for the boycott of the contest hosted by Israel, as part of the ongoing BDS movement.
Over 100 LGBTQ+ groups have also joined the campaign, as well as hundreds of artists including former Eurovision contestants, and the 1994 winner for Ireland, Charlie McGettigan.
In March, more than 100 Palestinian artists wrote an open letter appealing to all Eurovision finalists to withdraw, “to avoid participating in Israel’s explicit agenda of using international artists’ appearances to whitewash its crimes against humanity.”
26 Israeli artists also urged Eurovision contestants to cancel, saying in an open letter they “can’t sit silent as our Palestinian counterparts suffer silencing, dehumanization and violence”.
The Palestinian-led BDS movement was founded in 2005 with three aims: the end of Israel’s military occupation, full equality for Palestinians with Israeli citizenship, and the right of return for Palestinian refugees.
PACBI’s full statement to Hatari is below.
“Palestinians are calling on all Eurovision contestants to withdraw from the contest in apartheid Tel Aviv. This includes Iceland’s entrant Hatari, in particular, who are on the record supporting Palestinian rights.
“Artists who insist on crossing the Palestinian boycott picket line, playing Tel Aviv in defiance of our calls, cannot offset the harm they do to our human rights struggle by “balancing” their complicit act with some project with Palestinians.
“Palestinian civil society overwhelmingly rejects this fig-leafing, having learnt from the fight against apartheid in South Africa.
“While we appreciate gestures of solidarity, we cannot accept them when they come with an act that clearly undermines our nonviolent human rights movement. The most meaningful expression of solidarity is to cancel performances in apartheid Israel.
“We appeal to all Palestinian artists to refrain from organizing any activities with artists who violate the guidelines of the cultural boycott of Israel.”
In an open letter recently published by The Guardian, 20 British filmmakers and writers including Mike Leigh, Leila Sansour, Ken Loach and Prahitbha Parmar have criticized the hosting of an Israeli government sponsored film festival in the UK.
The letter cites the findings of the recent UN report on Israel’s violence against Palestinians in Gaza. It compares celebrity and business protests, against Brunei over its new anti-LGBT law, with those against Israel over its violence against the Palestinians.
“We’re shocked and dismayed to see how many mainstream cinemas – among them Picturehouse and Everyman – are hosting this year’s Israeli film festival, Seret, whose funders and supporters include the Israeli government and a clutch of pro-Israel advocacy organizations,” the letter read.
The letter added, according to WAFA, “This UN report is the latest in 70 years of reports of mass expulsions, killings, house demolitions, detention without trial, torture, military occupation and military onslaught against the indigenous population, the Palestinians. But none of this appears to disturb the cinemas involved in the festival.”
“We cannot understand why cultural institutions continue to behave as if Israel is an ordinary democracy. It is not. Palestinians deserve better than this. UK cinemas should not be hosting Seret.”
The letter cites the findings of the recent UN report on Israel’s violence against Palestinians in Gaza. It compares celebrity and business protests, against Brunei over its new anti-LGBT law, with those against Israel over its violence against the Palestinians.
“We’re shocked and dismayed to see how many mainstream cinemas – among them Picturehouse and Everyman – are hosting this year’s Israeli film festival, Seret, whose funders and supporters include the Israeli government and a clutch of pro-Israel advocacy organizations,” the letter read.
The letter added, according to WAFA, “This UN report is the latest in 70 years of reports of mass expulsions, killings, house demolitions, detention without trial, torture, military occupation and military onslaught against the indigenous population, the Palestinians. But none of this appears to disturb the cinemas involved in the festival.”
“We cannot understand why cultural institutions continue to behave as if Israel is an ordinary democracy. It is not. Palestinians deserve better than this. UK cinemas should not be hosting Seret.”
27 apr 2019
The Hamas Movement has strongly denounced the participation of Israel in the 2020 World Expo in the United Arab Emirates city of Dubai, describing it as a serious development.
In Twitter remarks, Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri urged UAE to backtrack on its decision to invite Israel to participate in the event.
Abu Zuhri said that allowing Israel to participate in Arab events would encourage it to persist in committing more crimes against the Palestinians and usurping the Arab nation’s rights, describing the UAE’s step as “a violation of the decisions taken during the Tunis summit.”
UAE invited Israel to the event despite not recognizing Israel as a state, which comes as another omen of strengthening ties between Tel Aviv and Arab Gulf countries spearheaded by Saudi Arabia among fears that these countries seek to liquidate the Palestinian cause through backing the US deal of the century.
For its part, Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu hailed UAE for inviting Israel to the event, describing the participation in the event as "another expression of Israel's rising status in the world and the region."
In Twitter remarks, Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri urged UAE to backtrack on its decision to invite Israel to participate in the event.
Abu Zuhri said that allowing Israel to participate in Arab events would encourage it to persist in committing more crimes against the Palestinians and usurping the Arab nation’s rights, describing the UAE’s step as “a violation of the decisions taken during the Tunis summit.”
UAE invited Israel to the event despite not recognizing Israel as a state, which comes as another omen of strengthening ties between Tel Aviv and Arab Gulf countries spearheaded by Saudi Arabia among fears that these countries seek to liquidate the Palestinian cause through backing the US deal of the century.
For its part, Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu hailed UAE for inviting Israel to the event, describing the participation in the event as "another expression of Israel's rising status in the world and the region."
