position:military prosecutor

  • Reminder: Israel is still holding a Palestinian lawmaker as political prisoner indefinitely
    Haaretz.com - Palestinian lawmaker Khalida Jarrar has been incarcerated in an Israeli jail without a trial for 20 months. Another period of ‘administrative detention’ will soon expire. Will she come home?
    Gideon Levy and Alex Levac Feb 14, 2019 5:20 PM
    https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-reminder-israel-is-holding-palestinian-lawmaker-as-political-priso

    Ghassan Jarrar, the husband of Khalida Jarrar, holds a portrait of her on April 2, 2015 at their home in the West Bank city of Ramallah.AFP PHOTO / ABBAS MOMANI

    Ghassan Jarrar says his life is meaningless without Khalida. In his office at the children’s toys and furniture factory he owns in Beit Furik, east of Nablus, its chairs upholstered with red fake fur, the face of the grass widower lights up whenever he talks about his wife. She’s been incarcerated in an Israeli prison for 20 months, without trial, without being charged, without evidence, without anything. In two weeks, however, she could be released, at long last. Ghassan is already busy preparing himself: He knows he’s liable to be disappointed again, for the fourth successive time.

    Khalida Jarrar is Israel’s No. 1 female political prisoner, the leader of the inmates in Damon Prison, on Mt. Carmel, and the most senior Palestinian woman Israel has jailed, without her ever having been convicted of any offense.

    The public struggle for her release has been long and frustrating, with more resonance abroad than in Israel. Here it encounters the implacable walls of the occupation authorities and the startling indifference of Israeli public opinion: People here don’t care that they’re living under a regime in which there are political prisoners. There is also the silence of the female MKs and the muteness of the women’s organizations.

    Haaretz has devoted no fewer than five editorials demanding either that evidence against her be presented or that she be released immediately. To no avail: Jarrar is still in detention and she still hasn’t been charged.

    She’s been placed in administrative detention – that is, incarceration without charges or a trial – a number of times: She was arrested for the first time on April 15, 2015 and sentenced to 15 months in jail, which she served. Some 13 months after she was released from that term, she was again put under administrative detention, which kept getting extended, for 20 consecutive months, starting in mid-2017: two stints of six months each, and two of four months each.

    The latest arbitrary extension of her detention is set to end on February 28. As usual, until that day no one will know whether she is going to be freed or whether her imprisonment will be extended once again, without explanation. A military prosecutor promised at the time of the previous extension that it would be the last, but there’s no way to know. Typical of the occupation and its arbitrariness.

    In any event, Ghassan is repainting their house, replacing air conditioners and the water heater, hanging new curtains, planting flowers in window boxes, ordering food and sweets in commercial quantities, and organizing a reception at one checkpoint and cars to await her at two other checkpoints – you can never know where exactly she will be released. A big celebration will take place in the Catholic church of Ramallah, which Ghassan has rented for three days on the last weekend of the month. Still, it’s all very much a matter of if and when.

    Reminder: On April 2, 2015, troops of the Israel Defense Forces raided the Jarrar family’s home in El Bireh, adjacent to Ramallah, and abducted Khalida, a member of the Palestinian Legislative Council.

    She was placed in administrative detention. In the wake of international protests over Israel’s arrest without charges of a lawmaker who was elected democratically, the occupation authorities decided to try her. She was indicted on 12 counts, all of them utterly grotesque, including suspicion of visiting the homes of prisoners’ families, suspicion of attending a book fair and suspicion of calling for the release of Ahmad Saadat, a leader of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine who has been in prison for years.

    The charge sheet against Jarrar – an opponent of the occupation, a determined feminist and a member of the Palestine Liberation Organization’s executive committee – will one day serve as the crushing proof that there is not even the slightest connection between “military justice” and actual law and justice.

    We saw her in the military court at Ofer base in the summer of 2015, proud and impressive, as her two daughters, Yafa and Suha, who returned from their studies in Canada after their mother’s arrest, wept bitterly with their father on the back benches of the courtroom. No one remained indifferent when the guards allowed the two daughters to approach and embrace their mother, in a rare moment of grace and humanity, as their father continued to cry in the back. It was a scene not easily forgotten.

    Three months ago, she was transferred, along with the other 65 female Palestinian prisoners, from the Sharon detention facility where she’d been incarcerated to Damon, where the conditions are tougher: The authorities in Damon aren’t experienced in dealing with women and their special needs, Ghassan says. The showers are separate from the cells, and when a prisoner is menstruating, the red fluid flows into the yard and embarrasses the women. But at the same time, he says, the prison authorities are treating Khalida’s health situation well: She suffers from a blood-clotting problem and needs weekly medications and tests, which she receives regularly in her cell.

    “You are my sweetheart” is inscribed on some of the synthetic-fur toys in the production room in Beit Furik. There are dolls of Mickey Mouse and of other characters from the cartoon world, sporting bold colors, along with padded rocking chairs and lamps for children’s rooms, all designed by Ghassan and all bespeaking sweet innocence and creativity. He’s devoted much less time to his factory since his wife’s incarceration. Of the 19 employees he had, only seven remain, one of whom, a deaf woman, is his outstanding worker. It’s a carpentry shop, an upholstery center and a sewing workshop all under one roof. Ghassan sells most of his products to Israel, although he’s been denied entry to the country for years.

    Now his mind is focused on his wife’s release. The last time he visited her in prison was a month ago, 45 minutes on a phone through armor-plated glass. During her months in prison, Jarrar became an official examiner of matriculation exams for the Palestinian Education Ministry. The exam papers are brought to the prison by the International Red Cross. Among others that she has graded were Ahed Tamimi and her mother, Nariman. Ahed called Ghassan this week to ask when Khalida’s release was expected. She calls her “my aunt.”

    The clock on the wall of Ghassan’s office has stopped. “Everything is meaningless for me without Khalida,” he says. “Life has no meaning without Khalida. Time stopped when Khalida was arrested. Khalida is not only my wife. She is my father, my mother, my sister and my friend. I breathe Khalida instead of air. Twenty months without meaning. My work is also meaningless.”

    A business call interrupts this love poem, which is manifestly sincere and painful. What will happen if she’s not released, again? “I will wait another four months. Nothing will break me. I don’t let anything break me. That is my philosophy in life. It has always helped me.”

    Ghassan spent 10 years of his life in an Israeli prison, too. Like his wife, he was accused of being active in the PFLP.

    In the meantime, their older daughter, Yafa, 33, completed her Ph.D. in law at the University of Ottawa, and is clerking in a Canadian law firm. Suha, 28, returned from Canada, after completing, there and in Britain, undergraduate and master’s degrees in environmental studies. She’s working for the Ramallah-based human rights organization Al-Haq, and living with her father.

    Both daughters are mobilized in the public campaign to free their mother, particularly by means of the social networks. Khalida was in jail when Yafa married a Canadian lawyer; Ghassan invited the whole family and their friends to watch the wedding ceremony in Canada on a large screen live via the Internet. Ghassan himself is prohibited from going abroad.

    During Khalida’s last arrest, recalls her husband, IDF soldiers and Shin Bet security service agents burst into the house by force in the dead of night. They entered Suha’s room and woke her up. He remembers how she shouted, panic-stricken at the sight of the rifles being brandished by strange men in her bedroom wearing black masks, and how the soldiers handcuffed her from behind. As Ghassan replays the scene in his mind and remembers his daughter’s shouts, he grows distraught, as if it had happened this week.

    Not knowing know what the soldiers were doing to her there, and only hearing her shouts, he tried to come to his daughter’s rescue, he recalls. He says he was almost killed by the soldiers for trying to force his way into Suha’s bedroom.

    After the soldiers took Khalida, preventing Ghassan from even kissing her goodbye, despite his request – he discovered his daughter, bound by plastic handcuffs. After he released her, she wanted to rush into the street to follow the soldiers and her captive mother. He blocked her, and she went to the balcony of the house and screamed at them hysterically, cries of unfettered fury.

    Last Saturday was Khalida’s 56th birthday. It wasn’t the first birthday she’d spent in prison, maybe not the last, either. Ghassan’s face positively glows when he talks about his wife’s birthday. He belongs to a WhatsApp group called “Best Friends” that is devoted to Khalida, where they posted his favorite photograph of her, wearing a purple blouse and raising her arms high in the courtroom of the Ofer facility. The members of the group congratulated him. Umar quoted a poem about a prisoner who is sitting in his cell in complete darkness, unable even to see his own shadow. Hidaya wrote something about freedom. Khamis wrote a traditional birthday greeting, and Ghassan summed up, “You are the bride of Palestine, renewing yourself every year. You are the crown on my head, al-Khalida, eternal one.”

    #Khalida_Jarrar

  • Gregory Klimov. The Terror Machine. Chapter 16
    http://g-klimov.info/klimov-pp-e/ETM16.htm

    Stalin’s Party

    The days passed into weeks, the weeks into months. An incessant lapse of time in which there was no purpose, in which one only looked back and felt a great emptiness in the soul.

    Winter had come. The New Year of 1947 was approaching. In us Soviet men, who stood on the bound between two worlds, this aroused few cheerful memories and still fewer cheerful expectations. We had recently witnessed two noteworthy events: in the October there had been the first post-war elections to the Berlin municipal council, and in November the regular election of candidates to the Supreme Soviet of the U. S. S. R.

    The German elections aroused far greater interest among the Soviet residents in Berlin than one would have expected. Perhaps it was because they differed fundamentally from those to which we were accustomed. It was strange to see the pre-election slogans of the various parties. We were struck by the powerful and intelligent propaganda of the Socialist Unity Party. Here one sensed the long experience of Soviet propaganda; it was self-confident and shameless. We, who were the masters of the S. E. D. and knew what was behind it all, were particularly struck by this latter aspect.

    I well remember one incident that occurred during the Berlin elections. One Sunday morning I and two other officers decided to take advantage of the fine weather to go for a motorcycle ride. We borrowed three heavy military motorcycles from the Auto Battalion and tore out of Karlshorst along the Frankfurter-Allee.

    On our way to the Alexanderplatz we overtook a slowly marching column of men with crimson banners and flags in their hands. The demonstrators made an exceptionally depressing and joyless impression. Men in Thaelmann caps and red armbands were bustling backward and forward along its sides. We accelerated to drive past. It had been organized by the trade unions of the Soviet sector to express the wishes and desires of the German people. Attendance was compulsory. Any man who didn’t turn up was in danger of losing his job. It was pitiful and absurd to see this flock of sheep moving along under the supervision of the herdsmen in Thaelmann caps.

    I don’t know how it came about, but all the three of us Soviet officers began to ride our powerful military motorcycles round and round that column. The demonstrators looked at one another anxiously, assuming that we were a military patrol sent to ensure that the procession didn’t melt away. The herdsmen stared at us in astonishment, and as we drove close to the edge of the column they had to jump aside to avoid being knocked down. For our part, we were sickened at the sight of this shameful comedy, and on the other hand we enjoyed not having to take part in it ourselves for once.

    On that same day a Soviet patrol shot an American who was attempting to photograph a similar demonstration in the Soviet sector of Berlin. Evidently someone was of the opinion that such photographs might have the same effect on the close observer that that procession had made on us.

    The elections were held on 21 October. I have never known people in the Soviet Union to take any interest in the results of elections to the Soviet elected authorities. But on that election day in Berlin I doubt whether there was one man in Karlshorst who was not interested in the results. Most interesting of all was the fact that the S. E. D. came last but one of the parties. Not much was said about this eloquent circumstance.

    In the S. M. A. Administration for Industry the Berlin elections led to the following conversation between Captain Bagdassarian and Major Zhdanov:

    “You know,” Captain Bagdassarian said, as he pointed to the results printed in one of the newspapers, “when I think of these elections I get a queer thought. All the parties are voting. Supposing the Communist Party gets a majority. Does it mean that the others will let it take over the power?”

    “Yes, it looks like it,” Major Zhdanov answered uncertainly.

    “That’s funny! If the Communist Party comes to power, its first step will be to wring the necks of all the other parties. Yet these other parties are ready to give the power into the Communist Party’s hands without making any resistance. That doesn’t make sense!”

    “You can’t make sense of this democracy business all at once!” the major sighed.

    “It’s utter idiocy!” the captain agreed.

    “Perhaps it isn’t so stupid after all.” The major knitted his brows in the attempt to get to the bottom of it all. “Democracy as a political form is the will of the majority. If the majority votes for communism, there will be communism. True, very few are voting for it at the moment!” he ended on a different note.

    “All the same, it’s queer.” Captain Bagdassarian ran his fingers through his curly hair. “They all sling abuse at one another, but nobody puts anybody else into prison. But we do just the reverse: one says nothing and is put in prison. A man doesn’t even think, and still he’s put in prison...”

    In December 1946 the Officers’ Club in Karlshorst was the scene of electoral meetings at which candidates were nominated for the U. S. S. R. Supreme Soviet. On the day set apart for the Administration for Industry all the workers in the Administration had to be present in the Club, which had been decorated for the occasion with additional portraits of the leaders, and red bunting.

    We sat for some time in the hall, utterly bored. At last the chairman called on a speaker, who had been previously arranged. With a paper in his hand the speaker went to the platform and, speaking in a monotonous tone, began to explain how happy we all were that we ourselves could elect the representatives to our country’s supreme governmental authority. Then a further speaker went to the platform to propose our candidate from the Special Electoral District formed by the Soviet Occupation Zone.

    Then the candidate himself came out from the wings and told us his life story. He was a general, but I doubt whether he had ever spoken in such a humble and lackadaisical manner in his entire previous military career. The second candidate was someone quite unknown to all of us. We knew such a person existed only when he went to the platform not from the wings, but from the body of the hall. He was chosen to play the role of candidate ’from the very heart of the people’. Both candidates had been put forward in advance by the S. M. A. Political Administration and had been approved by Moscow.

    We all waited impatiently for this boring procedure to finish, especially as it was to be followed by a film show. When the chairman announced that he proposed to take the vote the hall sighed with relief, and everybody hurriedly raised their hands without waiting to be invited. Armed with pencils and paper, the tellers hurried through the hall. The audience began to murmur with impatience. At last the votes were counted, and the chairman asked in a drowsy tone: “Those against?”

    There was a dead silence. Nobody stirred.

    The chairman waited for a moment or two, then looked round the hall. Then, to intensify the effect of the unanimous decision, he asked in a tone of assumed surprise: “Nobody against?”

    And thus we elected two men ’chosen of the people’ to the U. S. S. R. Supreme Soviet.

    The turn of the year brought several innovations that made one take yet another glance back over the eighteen months that had passed since the capitulation of Germany.

    In the early autumn of 1946 the United States Secretary of State, Byrnes, had made a speech in Stuttgart, soberly surveying events since the end of the war and indicating the main features of American foreign policy. Only now, after eighteen months, were the Americans beginning to suspect that it was hard to sup out of the same bowl as good old Uncle Joe.

    Byrne’s’ speech was not to the Kremlin’s liking, and it was given a sharp answer in Molotov’s speech on the occasion of the revolutionary celebrations on 7 November. So much importance was attached to this speech that it was made the subject of compulsory study in all the political study circles throughout the S. M. A.

    There was no attempt to conceal the connection between the Byrnes and Molotov speeches from the senior officials of the S. M. A.; the two speeches were studied simultaneously, and those taking part in the discussion had to unmask the American’s imperialist intrigues and to stress Molotov’s peace-loving policy. But Byrne’s’ speech was regarded as too dangerous for the less politically educated workers, and they were allowed to discuss only their own leader’s speech.

    These two political speeches can be regarded as marking the beginning of the cold war. In the Control Commission Allied relations cooled off still more and went no further than diplomatic courtesy required. Decisions affecting the future of Germany were more and more removed from the Control Commission meetings to the private offices of the Kremlin and the White House.

    This situation also served as a signal for a final tightening of the screw on the Soviet post-war front. The S. M. A. Political Administration issued an instruction accusing minor Party authorities of having lost contact with the masses and neglecting political educational work. This was the crack of the whip. One could guess what would follow. In fact the first consequence was a change of Party organizers in all the S. M. A. departments. This was followed by measures to tighten things up all through the Soviet machinery.

    Hitherto the Soviet residents of Karlshorst had lived and worked without engaging in political study. Anybody who knows anything about Soviet life will know what that meant. The higher authorities were secretly astonished, the smaller fry quietly rejoiced; but one and all held their tongues, on the principle of not mentioning the devil in case he appeared. But now political studies were started, including study of the Short History of the C. P. S. U. And it had to be carried through in shock tempo at that. Evidently to make up for lost time.

    The next step was a campaign to raise labor discipline. It was decided to remind Soviet citizens abroad that there was such a thing as the Soviet labor code. Brand-new boards with hooks and numbers were hung up in all the departments, and every worker in each department had to take off and re-hang his own allotted number four times a day. In the Soviet Union these boards are the object of fear, but their effect on us was rather to get our backs up.

    The head of the Administration for Industry, Alexandrov, entrusted his number to his chauffeur, who very quickly lost it. We officers regarded the boards as an insult and took it in turn to remove several numbers at a time. But once more Soviet law with all its consequences hung as a threat over the head of every one of us.

    Then a hysterical ’vigilance’ campaign was inaugurated. Personnel Departments were instituted in all the S. M. A. offices with the obvious job of keeping closer watch on the workers. Once more extensive questionnaires were drawn up ’for Soviet citizens abroad’. These with their endless list of questions had to be filled afresh every three months. Many of us kept a copy of the questionnaire and our answers, and next time simply copied the old answers on to the new form.

    A demobilized lieutenant of the N. K. V. D. forces was appointed head of the Personnel Department in the Administration for Industry. From the very beginning he behaved with such rudeness and insolence that many of the officers, who were of higher rank, were infuriated. His room was in the basement, and he would ring someone up: “Comrade Colonel, come down to me and fill in your questionnaire.” But as often as not he got the answer: “If you need it filled in, bring it up to me. At the moment I’m still a colonel, I believe.”

    An order issued by General Dratvin, chief of staff of the S. M. A., was circulated for the information of all members of the S. M. A. In it, without actually mentioning names, he stated that the wives of quite a number of highly placed Soviet officials were going to the Berlin western sector while their husbands were at work, and were forming impermissible acquaintances among officers of the western powers. The order spoke in very sharp terms; it referred to fashionable restaurants, expensive furs, and, to crown all, agents of foreign intelligence services. All the accused women were returned to the Soviet Union at twenty-four hours’ notice, and the husbands were sternly reprimanded for their lack of Bolshevik vigilance.

    The secret purpose of this unusually frank order was revealed in its second paragraph, in which all members of the S. M. A. were strictly forbidden to visit the western sector, and were reminded of the necessity to be particularly vigilant in the circumstances of residence abroad. The women were chastised in order to serve as a warning to others.

    In conclusion General Dratvin threatened the application of sterner measures to all who violated the order... down to and including return to the Soviet Union. In saying so much, the general went too far. For thus officially, in the words of the S. M. A. chief of staff, return to one’s native land was recognized as serious punishment for Soviet citizens abroad.

    None of this was anything new to us. We had experienced it all before, at home. But coming after we had won the war, after we had looked forward hopefully to changes in the Soviet system, and above all after our comparatively free life in occupied Germany, this abrupt return to former practices gave us furiously to think. Or rather, to avoid thinking if possible. That was the only hope.

    II

    I had made Major Dubov’s acquaintance during the war. Even a brief comradeship at the front binds men together more strongly than many years of acquaintance in normal conditions. That may have been the reason why we greeted each other as old acquaintances when we met again as fellow workers in the S. M. A

    He was over forty. Outwardly stern and incommunicative, he had few friends, and avoided society. At first I regarded his reserve simply as a trait of his character. But after a time I noticed that he had a morbid antipathy to anybody who began to talk politics in his hearing. I assumed that he had good reasons for his attitude, and never bothered him with unnecessary questions.

    It so happened that I was the only person Dubov introduced to his family. He had a charming, well-educated wife, and two children. When I came to know his family, I realized that he was not only a good husband and father, but also a rarely decent fellow morally.

    His one great passion was hunting. That brought us still closer together. We often drove out of Berlin on a Saturday and spent all day and all night hunting, cut off from Karlshorst and the entire world.

    On one occasion, tired out after hours of wandering through the dense growth of thickets and innumerable little lakes, we flung ourselves down to have a rest. The conversation happened to turn to discussion of an officer we both knew, and I casually remarked: “He’s still young and stupid...”

    The major gave me a close look and asked with a queer smile:

    “And are you so old and wise?”

    “Well, not quite,” I answered. “But I’ve learned to keep a still tongue in my head.”

    He again looked at me fixedly. “Tell me, has anything ever happened to you... of... you know what?”

    “Absolutely nothing,” I replied, realizing what he was hinting at.

    “Then why aren’t you in the Party?” he asked almost roughly.

    “I’ve simply not had the time,” I answered shortly, for I had no wish to go further into details.

    ’Now listen, Gregory Petrovich, it’s not a joking matter," he said slowly, and I caught an almost fatherly note in his voice. “For a man in your position it smacks almost of a deliberate demonstration. It might even have serious consequences for you.”

    “I’m doing my job as well as any Party man!” I retorted.

    He smiled, rather sadly. “That’s how I argued once,” he said with bitter irony.

    Then, without my prompting him, in an objective sort of tone he told me his story: how he had come to join the Party, and why he avoided people who talked politics.

    In 1938 Dubov was an engineer working in a Leningrad factory producing precision instruments. He was a capable engineer, and held a responsible post connected with the construction of instruments for the air force and the navy. He liked his job, devoted all his free time to research, and bothered little about politics. Despite his responsible post he remained a non-Party man.

    One day he was summoned to the director’s room. From that moment he was not seen in the works again. Nor did he return home. His wife found out what had happened to him when the N. K. V. D. men turned up at their apartment in the middle of the night, made a thorough search, and confiscated all her husband’s personal property. Next day she went to the N. K. V. D. to ask for news of him. She was told they knew nothing about him, and was advised not to worry, nor to worry others. If there were any need, she would be informed.

    Dubov spent more than a year in the investigation cells of the N. K. V. D. He was charged with sabotage and counter-revolutionary activity. The sentence was the standard one: ten years’ imprisonment, to be spent in one of the camps in Central Siberia, where new war factories were being built. There he continued to work as an engineer.

    He discovered the real reason for his arrest only two years later. Among a fresh batch of prisoners he recognized the former chief engineer at the Leningrad factory for precision instruments. Dubov was delighted to see him, but the man seemed restrained and avoided Dubov as much as possible. But as the months passed the two engineers struck up a friendship based on their common memories of freedom. One day the conversation turned to the reasons why they had been sent to the camp.

    “Someone denounced me,” Dubov said.

    The chief engineer looked away, then sighed, and laughed bitterly. “Would you like to know who it was?” he asked.

    Dubov stared at him distrustfully.

    “I did it,” the other man said, and hurried on without giving Dubov a chance to comment: “We regularly received orders from the N. K. V. D. to provide them with so many persons possessing such and such qualifications. The lists had to be drawn up by the Party organizer and confirmed by the chief engineer and the director. What could I do? I too had a wife and children....”

    “But why was I put on the list?” Dubov asked.

    “Because you were not a Party member,” the former chief engineer said. “The Party organizer put you down.”

    Dubov said nothing for some time, then he looked wearily at the other man and asked: “But how did you get here?”

    The engineer only shrugged his shoulders helplessly.

    Dubov spent four years in the camp. But during all those years he did not suffer as much as his wife and children. Under Soviet law a political prisoner’s guilt extends to include his family. His wife was morally and physically shattered. Their children grew up in the knowledge that their father was ’an enemy of the people’, and felt always that they were not like other children.

    In 1948 he was released before the expiration of his term. With no explanation given, he was completely rehabilitated and the conviction quashed. He was called up straight from the camp into the army. That was the real reason for his premature discharge. Without seeing his family he went as an officer directly to the front.

    At the front he was an exemplary officer, just as he had been an exemplary engineer in Leningrad and an exemplary prisoner in the Siberian camp. He was just to his men and ruthless to the enemy. And he was devoted to his native land, with all its Party organizers and prison camps.

    Shortly before the end of the war he received another battle decoration, and in addition was singled out for the honor of being invited to join the Communist Party. This time he did not hesitate. Without a word he filled in the questionnaires. And without a word he accepted the Party ticket, which the corps commander’s political deputy presented to him.

    In the S. M. A. Major Dubov was regarded as one of their most reliable and knowledgeable engineers. He was given the responsible task of transferring the German industry in the Soviet zone to new lines, but his rank and position remained unchanged. Why? Because, although he had been completely rehabilitated and the conviction had been quashed, in his personal file was a curt note: ’Conviction under article 58.’ That was enough to cast a shadow over all his future life.

    III

    During my stay in Karlshorst I formed a close friendship with Captain Belyavsky. Little by little I came to know his story too, though he talked about himself very reluctantly, and only dropped hints. In 1936 Belyavsky was in Spain, where he was a lieutenant in the staff of the Republican forces. This was about the time that the Yezhov terror was at its height in the Soviet Union, and one night his father was arrested, to vanish without trace. Belyavsky was immediately recalled from Spain and demobilized. Until 1941 he shared the fate of other relatives of ’enemies of the people’; in other words, he was outside the pale.

    All those spheres of Soviet life in which the first requirement is a completed questionnaire were closed to him. Only a Soviet citizen can understand all the significance of such a situation. When war broke out in 1941 he was not called up for the army, since he was ’politically unreliable’. But when the German forces began to lay siege to his native city, Leningrad, he went to the military commander and volunteered for service. His request was granted, and that same day, as an ordinary private, he was flung into the fight - in a punitive battalion. In other words, straight to his death. But fate was more merciful to him than the Soviet regime, and he escaped with a wound.

    He spent the next three years as an ordinary soldier, going right through the siege of Leningrad. His service was exemplary, and he was recommended again and again for officer’s rank, but each time the questionnaire put an end to the story. In 1944, when the Soviet armies were suffering from a very serious shortage of officers, he was summoned to the staff once more.

    The colonel who interviewed him pointed to the entry: ’article 58’ on his questionnaire and asked: “Why do you always mention that?”

    Belyavsky did not reply.

    “Is it that you don’t want to fight?” the colonel asked sharply; he avoided looking at the decorations on Belyavsky’s chest. Belyavsky only shrugged his shoulders. The decorations rattled a little, as though answering the colonel’s question.

    “If you continue to make such entries, I must regard it as an attempt to avoid military service,” the colonel said. “Take a new form and fill it in properly. Leave a space for your service rank.”

    Private Mikhail Belyavsky did not return to his company. But next day First-Lieutenant Belyavsky was on his way to Moscow. In his pocket he had an order to proceed to the Military-Diplomatic College of the Red Army General Staff. Men were needed in wartime, and there was no bothering about a thorough examination of questionnaires. There would be plenty of opportunity for that after the war. And so Mikhail Belyavsky entered one of the most privileged military colleges in the Soviet Union.

    He was discharged from the college in the autumn of 1945 with the rank of captain, and was sent to work in the Soviet Military Administration. That was nothing extraordinary. Many of the students were freed from further study even in the middle of their second-year course, in order to take up a post.

    Captain Belyavsky’s personal file, which was kept in the S. M. A. Personnel Department, was in spotless order. All through his documents the phrase occurred again and again: ’Devoted to the Lenin-Stalin Party’. That was a stereotyped remark and was to be found in almost every officer’s personal file, but it was truer of him than of the majority.

    Certain days were set apart for political instruction, and on one of these days Belyavsky went to his office two hours earlier, as was his custom, and unfolded his papers. The educational circle to which he belonged was of a rather higher level, for it consisted exclusively of men with advanced education. With earnest faces they pored over the pages of the Short Course, though they must have known that the book was full of lies and falsifications.

    The leader of the circle, who normally was one of themselves, began proceedings by asking:

    “Well, who’s prepared to open on the third chapter? Any volunteers?”

    They all bowed their heads even lower over their books. Some of them began to turn over their papers hurriedly; others fixed their eyes on the table as though collecting their thoughts with a view to speaking later. There was no volunteer.

    “All right, then we’ll follow the list,” the leader proposed. There was a sigh of relief.

    The majority of the circle leaders kept alphabetical lists of their circle members. Each member knew whom he followed. And so the question was settled quite simply. The first on the list began to deliver a summary of the chapter, while the one who was to follow him read farther, underlining passages with red pencil. In this way the majority of circles got through their course without difficulty.

    All the members of Belyavsky’s circle had worked through the Short Course several times already. They were all bored to tears. When each had done his duty he sat gazing out of the window, smoking, or sharpening his pencil.

    Everything went off as usual. The speakers droned away monotonously. The leader sat with his eyes on his notebook, not even listening. It was a hot day, and everybody felt sleepy. And in that drowsy kingdom something happened to Captain Belyavsky that he himself would have had difficulty in explaining.

    When his turn was reached he had to expatiate on the passage which deals with the Entente’s three anti-Soviet campaigns. The theme had a heroic quality and there were parallels to the experiences of the war just ended. As soon as Belyavsky began to speak the leader raised his sleepy eyes and stared at him in astonishment. And one by one all the others began to gaze at him in bewilderment.

    For he spoke as though addressing a meeting. His voice had a note of unusual conviction. It sounded a note of faith, of challenge. He depicted the three foreign interventions in Soviet Russia after the 1917 revolution, and cleverly linked them up with the invasion and destruction of the Nazi armies in 1941-1945. He did not summarize the Short Course; he spoke extemporaneously, from a heart burning with conviction. The bewildered looks of his fellows expressed the mute question: ’Has he gone mad? Why all this unnecessary bother?’

    It happened that the circle that day included the Instructor from the S. M. A. Political Administration, who was there as observer. Belyavsky’s speech attracted his notice; obviously he had not often heard anyone speak with conviction in these circles for political education. He made a note of the name. Next day Belyavsky was summoned to the Political Administration.

    “Listen, Comrade Captain,” the instructor said to him. "I’m amazed at you. I’ve been looking through your personal file. An exemplary officer, the finest of testimonials, and yet you’re not a Party member. That simply won’t do. The Party must interest itself in men like you...

    “No, no, no...” he raised his hand, as though afraid Belyavsky might make some objection. “You made a very remarkable speech in the political circle yesterday... And yet you’ve never been drawn into Party work. We shall assign you to the task of giving political instruction to the officers’ wives. That to begin with. And secondly, you must put in your application for Party membership at once. No objections! Get that?”

    Belyavsky had no thought of objecting. Membership of the Party connoted a full and valid position in Soviet society. His heart was filled with joy; he shook the instructor’s hand with genuine gratitude.

    The November revolutionary celebrations were drawing near. In addition to having charge of a political education circle, Belyavsky was entrusted with the preparations for the festival. He plunged headlong into social and political activity and devoted all his free time to it. Spiritually he was born again. But above all he rejoiced because the Party had forgotten his past, because he was no longer a lone wolf. Only now did he fully realize how bitterly he had felt his alienation from society.

    Just about then an insignificant incident occurred which had unexpected consequences.

    Belyavsky was a keen motorcyclist. While working in the S. M. A. he had had innumerable specimens of motorcycles pass through his hands, and in the end he had picked on a very fine BMW sports model for himself. All Karlshorst knew that machine, and many a young officer stood to admire it as it flashed by.

    One evening, as he was riding past the house where Valia Grinchuk lived, he saw a light in her rooms, and decided to drop in and see her. He leaned the motorcycle against the railings, but did not lock it up, as was his habit, for he did not intend to stay long.

    Valia had guests, the company was a merry one, and he stayed longer than he thought. He left about ten o’clock. When he got outside his motorcycle had disappeared. He looked about him, thinking someone must be playing a practical joke. But there was no sign of it anywhere.

    He broke into a string of curses. Obviously someone had stolen the machine. But what infuriated him most was the knowledge that the thief must be one of his own, Soviet, people. No Berlin thief would ever have dared to take anything from Karlshorst, least of all a motorcycle.

    The Karlshorst commandatura was only a few paces away. He went and reported the theft to the officer on duty. The lieutenant sympathized with him and promised to find out whether the theft had been committed by one of the commandatura guards. He knew well enough who were responsible for the majority of the thefts that took place in Karlshorst.

    Belyavsky had no great faith in the commandatura, and he decided to go straight to a German police station situated just outside the sealed-off Soviet area. He returned accompanied by a German policeman and a police dog. At the spot where the motorcycle had been left the policeman put the dog on the scent. It made directly for the next wicket gate and began to paw at it.

    Belyavsky knew that the Party organizer for the Administration of Justice, Major Yeroma, and his deputy, Major Nikolayev, lived there, and he thought the dog was completely on the wrong trail. But each time they tried out the animal it persistently led them to that wicket gate. In the end Belyavsky shrugged his shoulders hopelessly and let the German policeman go.

    Next day he happened to be passing the gate at which the dog had pawed, and he decided to go in and make inquiries. He found four young women sitting in the sitting room. One of them was the wife of Major Nikolayev; another was the wife of the head of the S. M. A. Political Administration, General Makarov.

    All the women were rather problematic wives, wives only within the bounds of Karlshorst. Almost all the high S. M. A. officials had exceptionally young wives. Marshal Sokolovsky’s wife was several years younger than his daughter was. Such things were the result of the war.

    Belyavsky apologized for troubling them, explained why he had called, and inquired whether they had noticed anything suspicious the previous evening. They exchanged embarrassed glances and expressed their indignation at the theft. They seemed bored, and they invited him to stay awhile. Quite an animated conversation followed, a conversation, which played a large part in the further developments, chiefly because he made a very good impression on those young women.

    After searching fruitlessly for a week he had resigned himself to | the loss of his favorite machine, when one evening he was called | to the telephone. He was astonished to hear a woman’s voice

    “Is that Comrade Captain Belyavsky?” the unknown asked, and went on hurriedly: “You mustn’t mind my not mentioning my name. I I’m one of the ladies who... you remember, you called to inquire | about the motorcycle.... I phoned up to let you know that your machine is in the cellar of the house you called at. Go at once and you’ll find it. You can guess who took it.... Please don’t tell anybody how you found out. I wouldn’t like...”

    He hurriedly thanked her and put down the receiver. He sat for a moment considering what he should do next. For the thief could be no other than the S. M. A. Party organizer for the Administration of Justice, Yeroma himself. Finally he decided to ask a Lieutenant-Colonel Potapov and Major Berko to go with him as witnesses. On their way to Major Yeroma’s house they picked up the officer on duty at the commandatura.

    Major Yeroma was not at home. At the commandatura officer’s request the cellar was opened. There they found the missing motorcycle. The commandatura officer drew up an official report on the theft and discovery of the machine. In his simplicity he wrote: ’The thief is Major Yeroma, of the Administration of Justice, and Party organizer to the Administration of Justice.’ The report was signed by all the witnesses, including Major Yeroma’s wife.

    As the four officers struggled to haul the heavy machine up the stairs, between their groans and pants the officer could not help remarking: “One man couldn’t have got it down there by himself. He must have had at least two others to help him.”

    It transpired that the day the machine was stolen Major Yeroma was returning late in the evening from the Political Administration, accompanied by two other officers of the Administration of Justice. As he approached his house the Major noticed the machine and, without stopping to think, persuaded the other two officers to help him put it in his cellar. Probably it would not have been found if Belyavsky hadn’t chanced to call on the young women.

    They knew that Major Yeroma had got hold of a motorcycle the previous evening, but they had no idea where he had obtained it. When Belyavsky told his story they put two and two together, but they did not tell him what they were thinking, for obvious reasons. After he had gone they quarreled among themselves. The young wife of the head of the Political Administration took Belyavsky’s side and declared that the machine must be returned to him.

    In his indignation he decided to take steps to bring the culprits to justice. He wrote reports of the affair to General Dratvin, the S. M. A. chief of staff, to the Political Administration, and the S. M. A. Military Prosecutor. If justice were done, Major Yeroma should be expelled from the Party, stripped of his officer’s rank and sentenced to imprisonment for theft. So the law prescribed.

    When Major Berko heard what Belyavsky intended to do he advised him not to be in any hurry. A charge against Yeroma involved much else besides him, and in such cases it was advisable to be prudent. He suggested that Belyavsky should first go and see Yeroma personally, and they decided to call on him during lunchtime.

    They found him at home. He was sitting at the table, with his tunic unbuttoned and unbelted. Before him was an aluminum dish of steaming beetroot soup. He did not even look up when the visitors were shown in, but went on spooning up his soup.

    “Well, Yeroma,” Belyavsky said, “how did my motor-cycle get into your cellar?”

    “I found it,” the major answered with his mouth full of food, and not batting an eyelid.

    “I shall send a report to the Political Administration.” Belyavsky was so taken aback by the Party organizer’s impudence that he didn’t know what else to say.

    Yeroma went on eating, or rather guzzling his soup; the sweat rolled down his face. When he had finished the dish he picked it up and poured the last few drops into his spoon. Then he licked the spoon and smacked his lips.

    “You’ll never make any impression on him with a report,” Berko said in a rage. “Spit in his plate and let’s go!” They went, slamming the door behind them. The same evening Belyavsky went to the office of the head of the Political Administration and handed the adjutant on duty his report. While the adjutant was reading it with some interest General Makarov himself came out of his room.

    “Another case relating to Yeroma, Comrade General,” the adjutant reported with a smile.

    “Ah! That’s good!” the general observed. “He’s already on our list for bigamy...”

    The adjutant afterwards explained to Belyavsky that, following his superiors’ example; Yeroma had taken a new wife to himself. But in doing so he had made one tactical error: unlike others, he had registered his marriage at the Soviet register office in Karlshorst. But he had not taken the trouble to obtain a divorce from his first wife, who was in Russia.

    Belyavsky then went to the S. M. A. military prosecutor, Lieutenant-Colonel Orlov. Orlov knew Belyavsky personally, and he told him frankly: “We can’t take him to court. In this case it all depends on the Political Administration. You know yourself it’s a Party matter.”

    If Belyavsky had had more experience in Party matters, he would probably have avoided measuring his strength against the Party. Meanwhile, the Political Administration had received a resolution from a local Party group recommending Captain Belyavsky’s acceptance as a Party member. His application was accompanied by brilliant testimonials to his conduct during the war. But now the affair of the stolen motorcycle was beginning to be talked about all over Karlshorst. In order to smother the scandal the Political Administration decided that it must close the mouth of one of the two antagonists, and the choice fell on Belyavsky.

    Quite unexpectedly he received the order that he was to be demobilized and returned to the Soviet Union. He knew at once what was behind that order. What he did not know was that on his return he was to be brought to trial. The explanation was quite simple. Not long before the motorcycle incident he had filled up one of the regular questionnaires. This time, in accordance with new, strict instructions, it was sent to the local M. V. D. departments in all his previous places of residence, to be checked. It was returned from Leningrad with the comment: ’father sentenced under article 58.’ So he was demobilized and sent back to the U. S. S. R., where he was tried for making a false statement which he had been forced into making under threat of court-martial.

    Belyavsky’s collision with the Party in the person of Major Yeroma was not a decisive factor in his recall to the Soviet Union. He belonged to a category of people whose fate was predetermined. That was shown by the fact that almost at the same time Major Dubov also was demobilized and recalled. Only the S. M. A. Personnel Department and Major Dubov himself knew what was behind that order. He, too, had to take his postwar place in life.

    IV

    Two men in my close circle of acquaintances had been cut out of life and thrown overboard. I respected them as men and liked them as colleagues. Others, too, thought of them as fine exemplars of the new Soviet society. Neither of them had anything in common with the old classes, which, according to Marxism, were destined to be eliminated. They had both been created by the Soviet world and were, in the best sense of the words, true citizens of Soviet society. Yet they were condemned, irrevocably condemned to death. To spiritual death at the least. And there are millions of similar cases.

    That can easily be proved. During the thirty years of the Soviet regime at least thirty million people have been subjected to repressive measures on political grounds. As the families of all such people are automatically classified as politically unreliable, if we assume that each of them had only two relatives at least sixty million people must be on the black list.

    If ten million out of the thirty million died in prison camps, and at least another ten million are still in the camps, while ten million have served their time and been released, we get a figure of eighty million people whom the Soviet State has turned into its enemies, or, at least, regards as its enemies. That explains why in every section of the Soviet state apparatus there are personnel departments charged with the scrutiny and check of questionnaires. Today it is indubitable that the main class of the new Soviet society consists of millions of automatic enemies of the Soviet State.

    This invisible class of enemies who are also slaves permeates all society from top to bottom. Is it necessary to cite examples? One could mention the names of many marshals of the Soviet Union, as well as Stalin prize-winners, who have been in N. K. V. D. prisons; and these would be names known all over the world. Of the millions of petty collisions between State and individual who can speak?

    State and individual! Involuntarily I think of Valia Grinchuk, an undersized girl, and a partisan fighter who in the fight for her freedom took up arms. She fought bravely. She not only defended her freedom against the foreign enemy; she climbed the ladder of Soviet society. She raised herself out of the gray mass and became an individual. And hardly had she achieved this when she felt the heavy hand of the State.

    Her duties often took her to the Allied Control Commission. There she came to know a young Allied officer. There could be no outward objection to this acquaintance, as she visited the Control Commission in the course of her work. After some time the acquaintance developed into a personal friendship.

    One day she was summoned to the Party organization. She was given to understand quite amiably that the Party knew of her acquaintance with an Allied officer. To her astonishment, that was all that was said, and it seemed that the Party leaders were quite sympathetic in regard to the friendship. Some time later this incident was repeated, and she had the impression that they were even encouraging the acquaintance.

    Time passed and this friendship between a Soviet girl and an Allied officer developed into a genuine attachment. But now she was once more summoned to the Party organization, and, as a Party member, was confronted with the demand to harness her love to State interests.

    Next day she was taken to hospital. The doctors found she had a very high temperature and blood pressure, but could find no visible reason for her condition. Weeks passed without any change for the better.

    One day an elderly, experienced neuro-pathologist came to her ward, studied her case history, and shook his head as he asked her: “Have you met with any great unpleasantness... in your personal life?”

    “No!” she curtly replied.

    She spent more than two months in hospital. When she was discharged she applied on health grounds to be transferred to work which did not bring her into contact with the Control Commission. Through acquaintances she informed her lover that she had been recalled to Russia. Valia had the heart of a soldier.

    Only very few people knew the connection between these incidents. Everybody continued to regard her as a fine officer who was assiduously doing her duty in Soviet society. And only a few noticed that she began to leave off wearing her officer’s tunic with its decorations, and took to ordinary feminine clothes.

    All these things happened to people who were close acquaintances of mine. They affected me personally because sooner or later I, too, would have to join the Party. There was no other choice, except to face up to a future, which for Major Dubov and Captain Belyavsky had become the present.

    Today there is no Communist Party in the Soviet Union. There is only Stalin’s Party with its obsolete facade. The aim and end of that Party is power, indivisible power. The ideal Party member should not have any independent thought; he must be only a dumb executive of the higher will. A striking example is provided by Party organizer Major Yeroma, a bestial brute and an ideal Bolshevik of the Stalin school.

    I was wearing Soviet officer’s uniform and I was a child of the October Revolution. If I had been born twenty years earlier, I would perhaps have been a convinced Marxist and revolutionary, active in the October Revolution. Today, despite everything, I was still not a member of the Communist Party. If I had not been faced with the necessity, the indubitable necessity, it would never even have entered my head to join the Party, which was called the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.

    Sommaire https://seenthis.net/messages/683905
    #anticommunisme #histoire #Berlin #occupation #guerre_froide

  • An Israeli and a Palestinian slap a soldier. Guess who’s still in prison? +972 Magazine | By Edo Konrad |Published March 25, 2018
    https://972mag.com/an-israeli-and-a-palestinian-slap-a-soldier-guess-whos-still-in-prison/134017

    Minutes before an Israeli military judge signed off on Ahed Tamimi’s plea deal last week, something unexpected happened inside Israel’s Ofer Military Court. A Jewish Israeli activist rose from the back benches, approached the military prosecutor, slapped him across the face, and yelled, “who are you to judge her?”

    If ever there were an apt example of the glaring disparities between the way Israel’s justice system treats its own citizens versus its Palestinian subjects, it was on full display for the world to see in Ofer Military Court that evening.

    Ahed, the 17-year-old Palestinian girl from Nabi Saleh whom Israel arrested for slapping one of its soldiers across the face late last year, had spent the previous three months in prison — repeatedly denied bail by military judges who deemed her a danger to public security. An Israeli Jew would have been released within days, and an Israeli minor within hours, activists argued.

    Now we can say with no uncertainty that they are correct.

    It was at the end of the sentencing hearing for Nariman Tamimi, Ahed’s mother who was arrested alongside her, that Israeli activist Yifat Doron stood up and slapped the uniformed military prosecutor — a soldier. Just like Ahed did.

    She was was quickly arrested.

    The next day, police brought Doron before a civilian judge in a civilian court and asked that she be remanded to custody for another five days, arguing that they needed more time to finish the investigation.

    Doron, who insisted on representing herself, told the judge that she was not opposed to remaining in jail and that she actually agrees with the police. “Anyone who does not toe the line with your apartheid regime or dares to think in an independent manner does indeed constitute a threat to the police,” she told the court.

    The judge disagreed. He ordered Doron released. (...)

    For [ Yifat] Doron, the decision to slap the military prosecutor was primarily an act of solidarity. “Nariman is one of my best friends,” she told +972 Magazine by phone a few days after her release. “She is one of the bravest people I know. For me, she symbolizes the suffering and injustice that people face under this regime. I did this to show that I support her.” (...)

  • L’UE « #profondément_préoccupée » par l’arrestation par Israël de mineurs palestiniens à la suite de la détention d’Ahed Tamimi

    EU ’deeply concerned’ over Israel’s arrest of Palestinian minors in wake of Ahed Tamimi detention
    Noa Landau Jan 14, 2018 3:24 AM
    read more : https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.834673
    https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.834673

    European Union representatives in the West Bank and in Gaza released on Friday a statement in which they expressed their “deep concern” over the arrests of Palestinian minors.

    They highlighted in particular three recent and high-profile instances: the arrests of Ahed Tamimi and Fawzi Muhammad al-Juneidi (the sixteen-year-old Palestinian teen whose arrest in which he was circled by soldiers in Hebron was caught on video) and the shooting that resulted in the death of seventeen-year-old Musaab al-Tamimi (a relative of Ahed).

    The case of Ahed Tamimi drew attention and criticism after the sixteen-year-old Palestinian activist was detained. Her December arrest happened after she slapped an Israeli soldier, and she was later indicted on five counts of assaulting security forces and for throwing stones by the Israeli army’s military prosecutor. Her mother, Nariman Tamimi, was charged for incitement on social media and for assault.

    In their statement, the European Union Representative and Head of Mission in Jerusalem and in Ramallah assessed that some 300 Palestinian minors are currently behind held in detention by Israel.

    The representatives reminded in their statement of the importance of defending the rights of children, especially during arrest, and called on Israeli authorities to “respond proportionately to protests, and open investigations following fatalities, in particular when involving a minor.”

    “The European Union and EU Missions in Jerusalem and Ramallah continue to promote and protect the rights of the child. And we call on Israel to act accordingly, as the occupying power and duty bearer,” the statement went on to say.

  • After a year in prison, Israeli court denies release of Palestinian circus performer
    Dec. 10, 2016 5:19 P.M. (Updated: Dec. 10, 2016 5:27 P.M.)
    http://www.maannews.com/Content.aspx?ID=774356

    BETHLEHEM (Ma’an) — After almost one year since Israeli authorities detained Palestinian circus performer Muhammad Faisal Abu Sakha , 23, and placed him under administrative detention, a petition to release him was rejected by the Israeli High Court, according to a Saturday statement from the Palestinian Circus School in Ramallah.

    The statement said that after only 15 minutes of deliberation on Dec. 5, the court rejected the petition to release Abu Sakha based on “the same secret evidence opinion produced by the Military Prosecutor in December 2015,” that was used to justify his administrative detention order.

    The only information provided over the course of Abu Sakha’s detention is that Israeli authorities have deemed him a “security threat,” something the school slammed as an “unfounded claim.”

    The school highlighted the complete the lack of evidence against Sakha, as is typical of administrative detention — Israel’s widely-condemned policy of internment without charge or trial in maximum six-month long renewable intervals based on undisclosed evidence, that even a detainee’s lawyer is barred from viewing.

    “As long as no charges and accessible evidence are formally brought against him, Abu Sakha will be prevented from defending himself and effectively denied his right to a fair trial,” the statement said.

    The school urged foreign missions in Palestine who have previously spoken out against Israel’s administrative detention policy, to “put pressure on Israel to stop the arbitrary use of administrative detention and free all Palestinian administrative detainees or give them the right to a fair trial.”

    • Israel indicts Palestinian astrophysicist despite Thursday decision to free him
      May 29, 2016 8:39 P.M. (Updated: May 29, 2016 9:03 P.M.)
      http://www.maannews.com/Content.aspx?id=771674

      RAMALLAH (Ma’an) — Palestinian professor and astrophysicist Imad Barghouthi is facing charges of “incitement” by Israeli authorities, despite a decision Thursday by the Israeli military appeals court to release him from custody due to lack of sufficient evidence, according to the Palestinian Prisoner’s Society (PPS).

      In a statement released by PPS on Sunday, the group said Israeli military prosecution submitted the indictment to the military court accusing Barghouthi of incitement against Israel on Facebook.

      Earlier on Sunday, the statement added, Israeli intelligence questioned Barghouthi at Ofer prison, where he is being held under Israel’s notorious policy of administrative detention — commonly used as a means of internment without charges or trial based on undisclosed evidence.

      PPS senior lawyer Jawad Boulous described the decision to keep Barghouthi in custody as “extremely absurd,” taking into account that the Israeli military prosecutor announced at Thursday’s court hearing that there was not enough evidence to indict him.

      The appeal presented to the Israeli court was signed by hundreds of scientists and academics from all over the world demanding Barghouthi’s release. A similar petition signed by academics was submitted to Israeli courts during the imprisoned professor’s court hearing earlier in May.

  • The IDF is putting Palestinians on trial for Facebook posts | +972 Magazine

    http://972mag.com/the-idf-is-putting-palestinians-on-trial-for-facebook-posts/117910/?can_id=c04bd6c1866a7591ea05420e1dd77aec&source=email-what-were-reading-endi

    Roughly 150 Palestinians have been put on trial in Israeli military courts for alleged incitement on Facebook. Now, the army and Shin Bet are having a hard time proving what incitement is, and often times just give up. Instead of releasing suspects as its own courts order, the army is putting them in administrative detention.

    By Hagar Shezaf
    Israeli soldiers arresting a Palestinian man, September 27, 2008. (Photo by Anne Paq/Activestills.org)

    Israeli soldiers arresting a Palestinian man, September 27, 2008. (Photo by Anne Paq/Activestills.org)

    In a small caravan that serves as a courtroom at the Israeli army’s Ofer Military Court, a boy in his late teens from the West Bank village of Silwad is standing trial on charges of incitement on online social networks. In the hearing, which lasts only a few minutes, the military prosecutor argues that the fact that the teen shared a photo of a martyr constitutes a threat to the security of the region; the defense attorney counters that sharing a photo falls under the right to freedom of expression.

    #israël #palestine #réseaux_sociaux #facebook #résistance

  • The Face of Collateral Damage: Palestinian Student Killed by Israeli Forces - Gideon Levy and Alex Levac Dec 25, 2015 7:00 PM
    http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.693675

    After Israel Defense Forces soldiers killed Samah Abdallah , the Israeli media did not even bother to mention that the 18-year-old was shot in the head while she was riding, along with other family members, in her father’s car.

    Samah Abdallah was a beautician and cosmetology student from a little-known Palestinian village, who was shot to death either on purpose or by accident – but most assuredly without any legitimate reason. Five or six bullets were fired at the car, fired by a soldier from a fortified watchtower nearby; one hit her directly in the head. Samah sustained mortal injuries, and died a few weeks later in an Israeli hospital.

    It all began on November 23, with a concerned and anxious father: Abed Abdallah, 42, worked in construction in Israel until recently. He did not want his daughter to use public transportation to get home from the Nablus school where she was studying with her younger sister Hanin, 17. Samah had been thinking of enrolling in university next year, in order to get a teaching degree.

    It has been an extremely tense few months on the roads of the West Bank, for Palestinian residents too, and Abed decided to pick up his two daughters that day, lest they run into trouble on the way home. He does this every so often, primarily when tensions run high.

    The family lives in one of the tiniest of villages – a hilly, remote place called Amoriya, with breathtaking scenery, southeast of Salfit and the settlement of Ariel.

    That morning, Samah and Hanin set out at 7:30 for school in a shared taxi. At noon, Abed left Amoriya together with his wife, Hala, and their son Ahmed, 15, to pick them up. The drive went without mishap, and took less than half an hour. The daughters got into the back seat, with Samah in the middle; their parents were in front.

    After passing the Hawara checkpoint, which was not manned at the time by IDF soldiers, they approached a bus stop. Abed noticed a teenage boy and a few soldiers there; he says now that he was certain the boy was a Jew. Worried that stones would be thrown at the car, Abed continued to drive and had gone a few meters when he heard gunfire.

    No one had ordered him to stop. In the rearview mirror, Abed saw the boy fall to the ground, bleeding profusely. He says he did not see a knife or any other weapon in the boy’s hands. Subsequently, it developed that the youth, Alaa al-Hashash, 16, from the nearby Balata refugee camp, had been shot dead by one of the soldiers at the bus stop. The death of Hashash was reported by the Israeli media in a single sentence, “Another attempted terrorist attack was thwarted today near the Hawara checkpoint.” That same day, there were two other such attempts at other sites, so perhaps the killing of the teenager was of no special interest.

    Soon after Abed saw the youth collapse, a hail of bullets hit his car. Abed shouted to his wife and children to get down, but the rear seat was crowded and Samah was unable to crouch low enough. The bullets came from the rear, fired by soldiers standing near the bus stop, but also from the front – from an army watchtower. The lethal bullet was fired by a soldier in the tower, penetrating the windshield and hitting Samah in the middle of her forehead before exiting through the back of her neck. Her face was covered in blood.

    “Father – there’s blood!” yelled Ahmed. Abed thought it was his son who had been hit. Getting out of the car, he discovered that his daughter had been shot. The terrified family pulled Samah out and lay her on the road. Abed says now that he was certain she was already dead. A Palestinian ambulance quickly arrived, and evacuated her to Rafidia Hospital in Nablus.

    The Abdallah family’s car. Alex Levac

    “Why did you do that?” Ahmed says he screamed at the soldiers who began to approach. “The soldier told me: You had a knife. I told him: There’s no knife. He said: There is. I said: There isn’t. I said: Where’s the officer? He said: There is no officer.”

    Abed says that a few minutes later, the same soldier admitted about the shots fired at Samah that, “It was a mistake.”

    Samah was rushed to Rafidia. When her parents arrived, they were informed that she was in critical condition. A few hours later, it was decided to transfer her to an Israeli hospital. After initial admission to to Schneider Children’s Medical Center, she was transferred to the neurosurgery department at nearby Beilinson Hospital.

    In her report, Dr. Gili Kadmon, a specialist in pediatric intensive care, wrote: “Patient was shot yesterday in the Nablus area, at a range of 10-20 meters. Entry hole in the frontal lobe and exit hole in the occipitoparietal lobe. Extensive cranial injury. Upon admission, patient was unconscious and artificially ventilated; opens her eyes at moments of pain and coughs in response to suction …”

    Samah’s mother accompanied her to the hospital in Israel and didn’t leave her for a moment. Abed joined them the following day, once he received an entry permit. Samah was hospitalized for over three weeks, during which she underwent two operations. Last Wednesday, she passed away, her parents at her bedside. She never reopened her eyes.

    Asked for comment by Haaretz, the IDF Spokesperson’s Unit released the following statement: “During the incident, in which a terrorist was running while brandishing a knife toward civilians standing at a bus stop, IDF forces opened fire to neutralize the threat and protect the civilians. From the shooting, injuries were apparently incurred by passengers in the car behind the terrorist. The IDF regrets any injury to uninvolved bystanders and acts to avoid this as much as possible. The incident has been investigated and the results are being examined by the military prosecutor’s office.”

    Note the evasive wording: “From the shooting, injuries were apparently incurred by passengers in the car behind the terrorist.” As if the dying Samah had not been transferred to Israel for medical care with the army’s approval, as if there was any doubt she was killed by IDF soldiers.

    Abed says that the soldiers didn’t only kill Samah: “They killed our entire family. The soldiers didn’t have to shoot. Why did they shoot? They also could have shot Alaa al-Hashash in his legs, without killing him. Salah happened to be there, without having done anything. Nothing justifies this shooting. She died for no reason.”

    ANo government or army official thought to telephone the family following Samah’s death. Now Abed is preparing to submit a claim for compensation from Israel. For that purpose, he approached attorney Ghaslan Mahajna from Umm al-Fahm.

    Posted on the outskirts of her village are photos of Samah, who was buried in the little cemetery across from the family’s home. Mourners are served the customary dates and bitter coffee.

    Parked outside is the rundown Opal Ascona. Pictures of Abed’s daughter are taped to the windows, and a single memorial poster has been placed in the middle of the backseat, the exact place where Samah Abdallah was sitting before being shot to death.

    Gideon Levy
    Haaretz Correspondent

    #Palestine_assassinée

    • After Israel Defense Forces soldiers killed Samah Abdallah , the Israeli media did not even bother to mention that the 18-year-old was shot in the head while she was riding, along with other family members, in her father’s car.

      “Why did you do that?” Ahmed says he screamed at the soldiers who began to approach. “The soldier told me: You had a knife. I told him: There’s no knife. He said: There is. I said: There isn’t. I said: Where’s the officer? He said: There is no officer.”

      Abed says that a few minutes later, the same soldier admitted about the shots fired at Samah that, “It was a mistake.”

  • Don’t Shoot Down Breaking the Silence, It’s Just the Messenger - Israel News - Haaretz -
    Amos Harel Dec 19, 2015
    http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.692603

    Breaking the Silence was founded in the spring of 2004. Four freshly released soldiers from the Nahal Brigade, who served long tours in Hebron during the height of the second intifada, organized an exhibition that documented their experiences, which was displayed at the Academic College of Tel Aviv-Jaffa. Although some people were outraged by the exhibition, the discussion about the soldiers’ claims was conducted far more calmly than it is today – despite the fact that, back then, suicide bombers were still blowing themselves up on buses in Israeli cities.

    The current Israel Defense Forces chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Gadi Eisenkot, was the commander of all IDF forces in the West Bank at the time, and he raised a concern: Why did the founders of the organization not oppose the army actions while they were serving, or at least report on them in real time? His argument was unconvincing. In most cases, a corporal will have a hard time going before the company or battalion commander in real time and saying, “That’s not allowed.” They are not equals. Few soldiers – particularly during regular service – have the ability to make such complaints, especially at a time when military casualties are high and the atmosphere is charged.

    As the years went on, the IDF made two other, more substantial claims. The first regarded the difficulty in translating the soldiers’ testimonies into legal or disciplinary proceedings. Breaking the Silence has always maintained the testifiers’ anonymity, in order to protect them. And during cases where the military prosecutor was interested in investigating, such probes generally ended without results. IDF officials got the impression that publishing the testimonies was more important to Breaking the Silence than any legal proceedings. The IDF’s second claim pertains to the organization’s activities abroad. One can assume that this activity is mostly done for fundraising purposes, but holding exhibitions abroad and making claims about Israeli war crimes certainly offended many.

    This week, there was a new low point in the public campaign against the organization. This combined two trends, only one of which was open and obvious. The first is the direct attack on Breaking the Silence by the right, comprised mostly of McCarthyesque attempts to silence it. These attacks have a sanctimonious air to them. In the eyes of the attackers, the international community is ganging up on Israel, and Breaking the Silence is the source of all our troubles – everything would be fine if it weren’t for this group of despicable liars slandering Israel’s reputation.

    It is hard to shake the suspicion that the attacks against Breaking the Silence aren’t the act of an extensive network operating with at least a degree of coordination. What began as some accusations on Channel 20 continued with a venomous video published by the Im Tirtzu movement, which was immediately followed by demands from the My Israel group (founded by Naftali Bennett and Ayelet Shaked) to prohibit Breaking the Silence representatives from visiting schools. Somehow, Education Minister Bennett succumbed to their demands within a day. In the background, there was also a blatant attack on President Reuven Rivlin. At first, they tried to link him to Breaking the Silence. That failed, because the president made sure to defend the IDF’s moral standing at the HaaretzQ conference in New York. And then the “flag affair” happened, involving Rivlin, Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat and the Israeli flag.

    As usual, Im Tirtzu delivered the most extreme elements of the assault. Its ubiquitous video showed the word “Shtulim” – Hebrew for implanted, or mole – above pictures of four left-wing activists who looked like they’d been plucked from a “Wanted” list. The video didn’t leave much room for the imagination: “Shtulim” is another way of saying “traitors.”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02u_J2C-Lso


    Im Tirtzu accuses leftist activists of being foreign agents. YouTube/Im Tirtzu

    When one of the four featured activists, Dr. Ishai Menuchin – executive director of the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel – says he felt as if the spilling of his blood was being permitted, you can understand why he reached that conclusion. (By the way, Menuchin did reserve duty until an advanced age – in the Givati Brigade, of all places.) The claims that these four organizations are “collaborating with the enemy” have been rejected by the two previous military advocate generals, Avichai Mendelblit and Danny Efroni. Indeed, the two told Haaretz that they are often assisted by these human rights organizations.

    The mainstream media has provided the complementary side of the trend by airing Im Tirtzu’s videos. As journalists, they cluck their tongues and mock the style of the videos, but reap higher ratings. This approach works well in conjunction with media coverage of the current terror outbreak, which is treated relatively superficially and is often an attempt to tackle these issues without providing any broader context. Here, the goal is not to damage the left-wing organizations, but rather marketing a slant on the current reality for Israelis – as if we have the exclusive capability to both maintain the occupation indefinitely and remain the most moral army in the world. But the truth is, it’s impossible to do both. Also, there’s no empirical proof that the IDF is the most moral army in the world (a cliché Rivlin himself employed earlier this week).

    In many cases, the IDF makes an effort – and sometimes a tremendous effort. But it is still a giant war machine. When it is forced to act to defend Israeli civilians and advance into crowded, urban Palestinian territory – as it did last year in Gaza – it causes lots of casualties, which will include innocent civilians. And its control of the occupied territories involves, by its very nature, many unjust acts: limiting movement, entering civilians’ homes, making arrests and humiliating people.

    It is a reality that every combat solider in the West Bank, regular or reservist, rightist or leftist, is aware of. I can attest to it myself: For more than 10 years I was called up to serve in the West Bank many times, as a junior commander in a reserve infantry battalion – before and during the second intifada. I didn’t witness anything I considered to be a war crime. And more than once, I saw commanders going to great lengths to maintain human dignity while carrying out complex missions, which they saw as essential for security. Even so, many aspects of our operations seemed to me, and to many others, to fall into some kind of gray area, morally speaking. In my battalion, there were also cases of inhuman treatment and abuse of Palestinian civilians.

    Those who believe, like I do, that much of the blame for the lack of a peace agreement in recent years stems from Palestinian unwillingness to compromise; and those who think, like I do, that at the moment there is no horizon for an arrangement that guarantees safety for Israelis in exchange for most of the West Bank, because of the possibility that the arrangement would collapse and the vacuum be filled by Hamas or even ISIS, must admit: There is no such thing as a rose-tinted occupation.

    Breaking the Silence offers an unpleasant voice to many Israeli ears, but it speaks a lot of truth. I’ve interviewed many of its testifiers over the years. What they told me wasn’t the stuff of fantasy but rather, descriptions from below – from the perspective of the corporal or lieutenant, voices that are important and should be heard, even if they don’t present the whole picture. There is a price that comes with maintaining this abnormal situation for 48 years. Covering your ears or blaming the messenger won’t achieve anything.

    The interesting thing is that when you meet high-ranking IDF officers, you don’t hear about illusions or clichés. The senior officers don’t like Breaking the Silence, but they also don’t attack it with righteous indignation (although it’s possible that sentiments for the organization are harsher among lower ranks). In recent months, I’ve been privy to closed talks with most of the chain of command in the West Bank: The chief of staff, head of Central Command, IDF commander in the West Bank, and nine brigade chiefs. As I’ve written here numerous times recently, these officers speak in similar tones. They don’t get worked up, they aren’t trying to get their subordinates to kill Palestinians when there is no essential security need, and they aren’t looking for traitors in every corner.

    Last Tuesday, when Im Tirtzu’s despicable campaign was launched, I had a prescheduled meeting with the commander of a regular infantry brigade. In a few weeks, some of his soldiers will be stationed in the West Bank. Last year, he fought with them in Gaza. What troubles him now, he says, is how to sufficiently prepare his soldiers for their task, to ensure that they’ll protect themselves and Israeli civilians from the knife attacks, but also to ensure that they won’t recklessly shoot innocent people, or kill someone lying on the ground after the threat has been nullified.

    The picture painted by the brigade commander is entirely different to the one painted by Channel 20 (which posted on Facebook this week that “the presidency has lost its shame” following Rivlin’s appearance in New York). But it is also much more complex than the daily dose of drama being supplied by the mainstream media.

    Another victory for Ya’alon

    Last Sunday, the cabinet approved the appointment of Nir Ben Moshe as director of security for the defense establishment. The appointment was another bureaucratic victory for Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon, part of a series of such appointments over the past year. The pattern remains the same: Ya’alon consults with Eisenkot; Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has reservations, delays the process or even opposes outright; Ya’alon insists, but takes care not to let the rift become public; and in the end Ya’alon gets what he wants.

    Ya’alon isn’t generally considered a sophisticated bureaucrat. His political power is also rather limited. He has almost no sources of power within the Likud Central Committee. The fact that he remains in his position, despite the close coordination with Netanyahu and the joint positions they held during the war in Gaza last year and during the current strife in the West Bank, seems to hinge only upon Netanyahu’s complex political considerations. Still, through great patience it seems the defense minister ultimately gets what he desires.

    Ben Moshe’s appointment was first approved by a committee within the Defense Ministry last month. Ya’alon asked that the appointment be immediately submitted to the cabinet for approval, but Netanyahu postponed the decision for weeks before ultimately accepting it. This is partly because of the prime minister’s tendency to procrastinate, which also played a part in the late appointment of Yossi Cohen as the next Mossad chief. But in many cases, there are other considerations behind such hesitations, with the appointment of the current IDF chief of staff a prime example: Ya’alon formulated his position on Eisenkot months before the decision was announced. Eisenkot’s appointment was brought before Netanyahu numerous times, but the prime minister constantly examined other candidates and postponed the decision until last December – only two and a half months before Benny Gantz’s term was set to end.

    Even the appointment of the new military advocate general, Brig. Gen. Sharon Afek, which had been agreed by Ya’alon and Eisenkot, was delayed for months by Netanyahu’s reservations – which, formally speaking, should not be part of the process. Here, it seems the stalling was due to claims from settlers about Afek’s “left-leaning” tendencies, not to mention the incriminating fact that Afek’s cousin is Michal Herzog – the wife of opposition leader Isaac Herzog.

    Over the next month, numerous other appointments to the IDF’s General Staff are expected, but Eisenkot will call the shots and Ya’alon needs to approve his nominations. The chief of staff is expected to appoint a new naval commander; a new ground forces commander; new head of the technology and logistics directorate; new head of the communications directorate; and new military attaché to Washington. In most cases, generals will make way for younger brigadier generals. Eisenkot will likely want to see a more seasoned general assume command of the ground forces, though, and could give it to a current general as a second position under that rank. However, this creates another problem – any general given this job would see it as being denied a regional command post, which is considered an essential stop for any budding chief of staff.

    #Breaking_the_Silence #Briser_le_silence

  • Were All Palestinians Killed in Hebron Really a Threat to Soldiers? - Israel News - Israel News - Haaretz Israeli News Source
    http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.685913

    There are two versions to the recent spate of killings at Hebron checkpoints: IDF says Palestinians attacked them with knives and were shot, while Palestinians question whether the people even had knives at all. Haaretz examines the evidence.
    Amira Hass Nov 13, 2015 6:31 PM

    Border Police officers gather around the body of Dania Ershied, 17, who was shot to death at the Hebron checkpoint in disputed circumstances on October 25, 2015(AFP)

    The gallows humor that has made the rounds in Hebron in recent weeks has given birth to a new style of joke. For example, “The Israel Defense Forces showed the media knives [that were allegedly found in the hands of Palestinians] that were made in Germany, but here we only have knives made in China.” The jokes means:

    1. The IDF is planting evidence, and the proof is that Hebron is flooded with Chinese goods, not German;

    2. Whoever really wants to kill a soldier in Hebron should use a German knife.

    This black humor was born from the following statistics: Out of 70 Palestinians suspected of carrying out stabbing or car-ramming terror attacks, either in the West Bank or Israel, the security forces killed 43 of them between October 3 and November 9. Twenty-four of them were residents of the Hebron district, including 18 who lived in the city itself. Nine were killed near military checkpoints that sever the heart of Palestinian Hebron from the rest of its neighborhoods. A defense source told Haaretz there have been at least 10 other incidents, unreported, in which people were arrested carrying knives at checkpoints in Hebron during the same period.

    The Palestinians do not believe the standard Israeli version that the soldiers’ lives were in danger and therefore they had to kill the person. In some cases, they question whether the Palestinians even tried to attack the soldiers.

    Israeli media reports about the killings are uniform: A terrorist / male or female / attempted stabbing / terrorist killed. / Soldier / male or female / lightly wounded. Or no casualties among our forces.

    Haaretz independently examined six of the cases. Three cases were detailed in Amnesty International reports. On November 5, Haaretz asked the IDF Spokesperson’s Unit and the Border Police spokesperson to comment on eight deaths (here we will discuss only five of them). After six days, Haaretz received a short and generic response, unrelated to our specific questions.

    There are security cameras beside every checkpoint and settlement complex. Palestinians are convinced that the IDF permits only the publication of those videos that support its story, and refuses to release footage that proves the opposite. Haaretz’s request to the IDF to see the security camera footage was not answered.

    The parents of Dania Ershied, who was shot to death at a Hebron checkpoint on October 25, 2015. (Amira Hass)

    The black humor in Hebron also spawned another joke: Those passing through the checkpoints to the Old City should say the Surat al-Fatiḥah (the opening chapter of the Koran). In other words – prepare for death.

    Dania Ershied, 17, passed through the Hebron mosque checkpoint on October 25 at about 1:30 P.M. The checkpoint cuts off the way from the old market to the mosque square/Tomb of the Patriarchs. It was a Sunday. The normal afternoon lesson for Dania’s English course had been canceled, her parents later learned. She had no cell phone, and her house is without an Internet connection: That was how her father tried to protect her and maintain her innocence. In their simple apartment (which they rent from his father), her parents showed me the childlike pictures she drew and the handicrafts she loved to do.

    Instead of the English lesson, Ershied walked down the street to the checkpoint. A few Border Police officers were in the hut; others were outside it. The checkpoint itself consists of a revolving iron gate, with a metal detector gate and another revolving iron gate beyond that. A small table stands between the hut and the gate, and a large table stands outside the second revolving gate. There are also movable separation barriers that can be positioned as needed.

    The Israeli media reports were more or less the same. For example, a Haredi news website quotes a police spokesman saying: “The Palestinian woman aroused the suspicions of Border Police officers. She was asked to identify herself but suddenly pulled out a knife and drew near the soldiers while shouting at them. The soldiers fired precisely and she was neutralized. There were no injuries to our forces.”

    IDF soldiers around the body of Mahdi al-Muhtaseb, 24, who was shot to death while fleeing from a checkpoint in Hebron, October 29, 2015 (Reuters)

    In a video published on the NRG website, in which Ershied’s body is seen lying on the ground behind the overturned large table, a person says, breathing hard: “A terrorist tried to stab soldiers. Thank God she was shot and killed.”

    A Palestinian witness who entered through the checkpoint gates after Ershied told Haaretz that the 17-year-old passed through the metal detector gate and the two revolving gates, and was then asked to hand over her bag. The police officer put the bag on the table and shouted at her, “Where’s the knife? Where’s the knife?”

    The witness said Ershied looked scared, raised her hands and shouted, “I don’t have a knife, I don’t have a knife!” A police officer fired a warning shot that scared her even more. She jumped back (placing her out of sight of the witness, who at this point was ushered away by the police) and continued to shout that she didn’t have a knife. But one policeman or maybe more shot and killed her.

    In the Amnesty International report, which contains a similar testimony, it was noted that in the pictures released afterward, a knife was seen alongside the body. A defense source told Haaretz that Ershied had “suddenly pulled out a knife and moved closer to the soldiers. At this stage, it does not matter how old the person is – after all, yesterday we saw kids, 11 and 13 years old [the light-rail stabbing attack in Jerusalem on November 10]. When you look at a [young woman] such as Dania, she comes with a knife to the checkpoint. They call on her to stop. She moves closer to the soldiers and they shoot her.” The defense source did not address the witness’ statement.

    The scene in Hebron where Sa’ad Al-Atrash died on October 26, 2015.AP

    Mahdi al-Muhtaseb, 24, worked in two sweet-pastry bakeries. On the evening of October 29, he had plans to meet the young woman who was intended to be his fiancée. In the preceding days, he bought a large amount of nutritional supplements to complement his workouts at the gym. “Such a person is not thinking of suicide, nor about prison,” his mourning father and brother told Haaretz a week ago, at their home in Hebron’s Al-Kassara neighborhood. On the morning of October 29, he walked, as per usual, to his second job in the Al-Dik neighborhood – to a relatively new bakery called Tito. His home, the route, the bakery – all are in the H2 area under full Israeli control, although his home and the bakery are outside the area where the settlers live. On the way, he had to pass through the Al-Salaymeh checkpoint.

    Something happened at the checkpoint: Perhaps a fight broke out between a soldier from the Kfir Brigade and Muhtaseb. His family and neighbors assume the soldier taunted the young Palestinian, as often happens at the checkpoints, and that Muhtaseb retaliated. The soldier was wounded in the head. A neighbor said he noticed a soldier bleeding from his face. Muhtaseb started to run away. The owner of a nearby store saw him running and then heard heavy gunfire; shots also hit a car and the road. The store owner rushed to close his doors and go up onto the roof. In those few minutes, as video footage shows, Muhtaseb lay injured on the ground. Two Border Police officers were just five feet away from him, aiming their rifles. Muhtaseb moved a bit and raised his torso, and then one of the officers shot and killed him. The store owner, who had already reached the roof and knows Hebrew, heard one of the soldiers shouting, “No one take him and don’t touch him.”

    Haaretz asked the defense source why the soldiers killed Muhtaseb, who was already lying injured on the ground. “You must get into the soldiers’ heads and understand their perspective,” the source said. “A Palestinian comes and stabs a soldier in the head and flees [to a neighborhood where there are no Jews or soldiers – A.H.]. We don’t know if he has an explosive device on him or a weapon. The soldier asks [him] not to move. At some stage he tries to get up – and the soldier shoots again. That is what is expected of the soldier. Because maybe the terrorist was a suicide bomber with an explosive device, or takes out a gun and shoots him. You never know,” he adds.

    When told that Muhtaseb could have used the gun from the start, had he had one, the defense source responded, “Do you remember the case of Charlie Shlush? [A Border Police officer who, in October 1990, shot and wounded a Palestinian who had knifed to death two Israelis in Jerusalem. When Shlush went to arrest him, the Palestinian pulled out a knife and fatally stabbed Shlush in the chest.] You must remember, this is not a sterile [crime] scene. There are a lot of scenarios that, because of the terrorist threat, can still cause harm to the troops. They receive instructions, and those are the instructions,” he said.

    The last person to see cousins Bassam and Hussam Jabari – 15 and 18, respectively – alive was a Palestinian who lives near the Rajabi house, where a new settlement complex was established last year (Beit Hashalom, the House of Peace). This witness said that on their way home, at about 8 P.M. on October 20, the young men passed through the military checkpoint and the metal detector gate behind the Rajabi house and neared the intersection, near the road that leads from Kiryat Arba to the Tomb of the Patriarchs.

    The witness told Haaretz that the two cousins got frightened when a large group of settlers marched down the road, demonstrating over the killing of a Kiryat Arba resident in a car-ramming attack. He invited the boys to come into his house, but a soldier appeared suddenly and called for them to come to him. After that, all three went out of view because they were walking on the path behind the Rajbi house. A short time later, he heard a burst of gunfire. Pictures on Israeli websites show Hussam lying bleeding with a knife in his hand and Bassam sitting on the ground, a narrow and long object in his left hand. The Palestinian witness wonders how, if they had knives, the metal detector didn’t beep when they went through the checkpoint.

    This question prompts the Palestinian conclusion that the knives, or what appear to be knives, were planted on them. Such claims have been made in other cases, too, including Sa’ad Al-Atrash, who was shot to death by a soldier at the Abu Arish checkpoint on October 26. The Amnesty International report described the killing as a particularly egregious example of excessive use of lethal force.

    The report is based on a witness who saw what happened from the balcony of her house. She said Atrash came close to the soldiers and one of them asked to see his identity card. As soon as he put his hand into his pocket to retrieve the identity card, she said, another soldier who was standing behind him shot him on his right side. The witness said the soldier fired six or seven times, and Atrash lay on the ground bleeding for about 40 minutes without receiving medical aid. She also said she saw soldiers bring a knife and place it in the dying man’s hand.

    The NRG website reported that day, “A Palestinian terrorist came close to an IDF force in the position located next to the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron, at the entrance to the Avraham Avinu neighborhood. He tried to stab one of the soldiers there, but was shot and killed. The IDF Spokesperson’s Office said an attempt was made to stab a soldier next to the Jewish community of Hebron. An IDF force fired in order to remove the threat. There were no Israeli casualties.”

    Spokesmen for the IDF and Border Police issued a generic response to Haaretz: “With regard to the planting of knives at the scene of the incident, this is a false claim; no knives were planted by IDF soldiers or Border Police forces. Any attempt to distort the situation is unacceptable.”

    The witnesses in the four cases in question point to a regular pattern after the shootings: Soldiers and settlers crowd around the person (whether seriously wounded or dead), photographing him from every angle. The soldiers strip him of his clothes. Medical care is not provided in order to try and save lives. The body is removed after 30 to 40 minutes.

    The IDF spokesman and Border Police added: “In all the examples cited, the distance between the soldiers and terrorists was short and the soldiers felt an immediate life-threatening danger. Consequently, they opened fire to remove the threat, in accordance with the rules of engagement.

    “The events in question, as well as the claims about the manner in which the shooting was conducted, were investigated and the conclusions were passed onto forces in the field and for the examination of the military prosecutor’s office. IDF medical forces in the West Bank provide medical care to the residents of the region, Jews and Palestinians alike. In operational incidents, a quick check is made by the force to rule out the threat of an explosive device, and then medical care is provided immediately. In places where this did not happen, the procedure has been refined.”

    Amira Hass
    Haaretz Correspondent

  • Lebanon charges fake Twitter account creator
    http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Lebanon-News/2014/Aug-19/267695-lebanon-charges-fake-twitter-account-creator.ashx

    Military Prosecutor Saqr Saqr Tuesday charged Hussein al-Hussein for creating a fake Twitter account in the name of the Free Sunni Brigades of Baalbek.

    Hussein was also charged with threatening residents of Baalbek as well as the Lebanese Army and political and security figures, according to the National News Agency.

    Saqr also charged the suspect, who is in custody, with claiming responsibility for suicide attacks and rocket attacks on areas in Baalbek and Hermel with the aim of inciting sectarian strife among citizens.

    Hussein would face the death penalty if convinced.

    Black flags or false flag : Hezbollah plunged into Lebanon Twitter furore
    http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/black-flags-or-false-flag-hezbollah-plunged-lebanon-twitter-furore-71

    Their inquiries led to the arrest on Thursday of Yadi Hussein al-Hussein, a 19-year old from al-Shurawina, a Shiite-dominated district of the north-eastern town of Baalbek.

    Rumours had been circulating that the account was run either by Western intelligence agencies, or by nearby Arab states keen to foment sectarian strife in Lebanon, whose 15-year civil war came to an end in 1990.

    However, the tweets were found to have originated in Baalbek itself, and were allegedly sent from Hussein’s Blackberry phone.

    Illico, un certain nombre de relais médiatiques allèguent déjà qu’il s’agit d’un « membre du Hezbollah ».

  • Il-76 abattu à Luhansk, le procureur militaire d’Ukraine ouvre des poursuites contre des responsables militaires et la direction de « l’opération anti-terroriste ».

    Military prosecutor’s office opens case against army officials due to downed aircraft near Luhansk
    http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/military-prosecutors-office-opens-case-against-army-officials-due-to-downe

    The main department for supervision over the observance of laws in the military sphere of the Prosecutor General’s Office has launched criminal proceedings against officials of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and the operational headquarters for the management of the anti-terrorist operation of the SBU Anti-Terrorist Center due to the downing of an Il-76 aircraft near Luhansk, in which 49 servicemen were killed.

  • Search warrant for Tripoli-based Alawite leader Eid
    http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Lebanon-News/2013/Nov-04/236809-search-warrant-for-tripoli-based-alawite-leader-eid.ashx#axzz2j

    Military Prosecutor Judge Saqr Saqr issued Monday a search warrant for Arab Democratic Party Secretary-General Ali Eid, who last week failed to respond to a summons call over deadly August bombings in the northern city of Tripoli.

  • In Egypt, the stakes have risen | Comment is free | The Guardian
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/nov/13/egypt-stakes-have-risen?CMP=twt_gu

    The Egyptian revolution of 25 January, as we all know, had no leaders. But in the course of its unfolding, and in the months since, a number of people have emerged who are pushing it forward, advocating for it and articulating its principles. Alaa Abd El Fattah, the activist and blogger (and my nephew) who has been jailed by the military prosecutor in Cairo pending trial, is one of those. And in his character and the role he’s adopted, he embodies some of the core aspects of the Egyptian revolution.

    Alaa is a techie, a programmer of note. He and Manal, his wife and colleague, work in developing open-source software platforms and in linguistic exchange. They terminated contracts abroad and flew home to join the revolution. In Tahrir he moved between groups; listening, facilitating, making peace when necessary, defending the square physically when he had to.

  • Weapons Smugglers Charged in Beirut as Solidere Says it Doesn’t Have Inspection Duty at Marina - Naharnet
    http://www.naharnet.com/stories/en/12117-weapons-smugglers-charged-in-beirut-as-solidere-says-it-doesnt-have-

    The military prosecutor general has charged two Lebanese men with allegedly smuggling weapons from the Beirut Marina to Syria, a security source told As Safir daily published Saturday.

    Wasim Tamim and Samir Tamim, who hail from the northern port city of Tripoli, are members of the most prominent movements in the former parliamentary majority, sources said in reference to ex-PM Saad Hariri’s al-Mustaqbal movement.

    The men were arrested in Beirut last Friday, they said, adding that they have carried out more than 30 smuggling operations from Beirut to the Syrian city of Banias.

    C’est la suite de l’article du Akhbar que j’ai signalé hier :
    http://seenthis.net/messages/30263

    Affaire importante, puisque même le Nahar, ici, indique que ces hommes sont des membres du Courant du Futur de Saad Hariri.

    [Je conseille la lecture des forums de ce billet de Naharnet, assez rigolos.]

    • Un détail : ce genre d’information doit certainement rappeler aux libanais les ports contrôlés par les milices pendant la guerre « civile », dont les deux buts principaux étaient de permettre l’importation d’armes pour s’armer, et de prélever une taxe privée sur les produits légitimes qui étaient bien obligés de transiter par ces ports.