Vancouver Mayor Bows to Zionist Pressure

Christmas Card sent to the Mayor.

Mayor Gregor Robertson:
I would like to… Read more

Christmas Card sent to the Mayor.

Mayor Gregor Robertson:
I would like to make you aware that by equating Israel and its flag with the Jewish people, you are actually promoting anti-semitism and racism, something you claim to be against.
Also, with your insistence on labelling the burning of a homemade cardboard Israeli flag as an act of “hate, racism and discrimination”, you have now ensured that acts of anti-Palestinian and anti-Arab harassment will continue.
Here is my “Christmas Card” to you.
Hanna Kawas, Chair, Canada Palestine Association
Note: I am still waiting for a response from you to my previous two letters!
____________________________________________
Following are two emails I have sent to Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson regarding the incident at one of the pro-Palestinian rallies over the weekend, which Bnai Brith has tried to characterize as “anti-Semitic”. Not only has Gregor Robertson now publicly bowed to Zionist pressure in criticizing the burning of the Israeli cardboard flag, he also crudely compared it to the heart-breaking and very personal attack on a Muslim woman on the Skytrain. Furthermore, he did not even have the courtesy to respond to our first email, let alone engage with our concerns about the harassment the rally participants faced.
Send your own letter to the Mayor to express your outrage.
===========================================================
Sent: December 14, 2017 5:58 PM
To: gregor.robertson@vancouver.ca
Cc: CPA Vancouver
Subject: Your statement on Bnai Brith Canada website

On December 10, 2017, I sent the email below to your office. To date, I have received no reply. Rather, I just found out from other people that you had sent a statement to Bnai Brith Canada on Dec. 12th, which is on their website, and quotes you as noted below:

“Recently,” the mayor stated, “we have seen a number of incidents take place in Vancouver that threaten the inclusivity and safety of our city. From the burning of an image of the Israeli flag in protest to the Jerusalem debate this weekend, to the violent and unprovoked attack of a Muslim woman riding the SkyTrain last week… The City of Vancouver has a zero tolerance policy on hate, racism and discrimination and we will remain very vigilant against acts that threaten the diversity, safety and inclusivity of our city.”

Frankly, I am disappointed that you did not even feel we were worthy of a response or of being notified of your official statement that Bnai Brith is quoting. As we said before, we do not feel the burning of the cardboard flag was an anti-Semitic gesture. While we realize some people might find the action upsetting, to label it as “hate, racism and discrimination” is both inaccurate and inflammatory. You should know that a contingent of pro-Israel young men deliberately harassed people at both the rally on Friday night and the smaller demo on Saturday, and they were the ones who provoked any incidents that occurred. Although I was not personally at the Saturday event, I seriously doubt that the cardboard flag would even have been burnt at all if the taunting and harassment from these provocateurs had not occurred. If your office had bothered to consult with us in any way, you would know that it was their behaviour that was threatening to the rally participants and should be denounced.
It is chilling to know that our concerns and our public safety are of such low importance to your office.
We will be posting this letter on our website and will also post your response if one is forthcoming.

Hanna Kawas
Canada Palestine Association
==========================================================

From: Hanna Kawas
Sent: December 10, 2017 11:17 PM
To: gregor.robertson@vancouver.ca
Subject: Trumped Up Accusations of Anti-Semitism against Pro-Palestinian Rallies

Dear Mayor Robertson:

You may have received a statement from Bnai Brith Canada about Pro-Palestinian protests over the weekend. Here is a statement from the Canada Palestine Association directed to the media after inquiries about the Bnai Brith complaint.
Following is the text of our statement.

Vancouver media ignore large Palestinian protest, focus on video of reported Israeli flag burning

We were not the organizers of a Saturday rally at the Vancouver Art Gallery, and we are not aware of what happened or may not have happened there as we did not attend.
We did have a large rally outside the U.S. Embassy on Friday night that none of the media, including yourselves, reported on or chose to cover. That rally was organized by Canada Palestine Association, Stop War, and Independent Jewish Voices.
As for the general issue of burning the Israeli flag, we in the Canada Palestine Association-Vancouver would not consider this an anti-Semitic gesture. We do not equate Judaism with Zionism, nor do we equate all Jews with Israel. The Israeli flag represents the Israeli government, not all the Jewish people, and is being burned in many places around the world along with the U.S. flag. Is burning the U.S. flag anti-Christian or burning the Saudi or Iranian flag anti-Muslim? In fact, there is an Orthodox Jewish group, the Neturei Karta, that regularly burns the Israeli flag as a form of protest. Here they are in New York, Canada and Jerusalem. Is this also anti-Semitic?
Additionally, it should be noted that for Palestinian youth in the occupied West Bank, for example, the Israeli flag on the military jeeps that come screeching into their villages and homes represents only one thing – brutal oppression.
We feel the complaint you received is without basis, and is simply being used to obscure this latest infamy by both the U.S. and Israel against the legitimate and national rights of the Palestinian people. Furthermore, we find it distressing and ironic that your media only decides to pay attention to local Palestinian or pro-Palestinian protests when Israel advocacy groups or individuals make these unfounded complaints.

Hanna Kawas
Chairperson, Canada Palestine Association

Vancouver media ignore large Palestinian protest, focus on video of reported Israeli flag burning

Dec. 10, 2017

Canada Palestine Association received two inquiries from… Read more

Dec. 10, 2017

Canada Palestine Association received two inquiries from Vancouver media today (CTV Vancouver, CKNW) about a video sent to them by a “Jewish advocacy group” claiming a likeness of an Israeli flag was burnt at a Saturday protest and that group considers the gesture anti-Semitic. Here is the written response we sent to them.
————————————————————

We were not the organizers of a Saturday rally at the Vancouver Art Gallery, and we are not aware of what happened or may not have happened there as we did not attend.
We did have a large rally outside the U.S. Consulate on Friday night that none of the media, including yourselves, reported on or chose to cover. That rally was organized by Canada Palestine Association, Stop War, and Independent Jewish Voices.

As for the general issue of burning the Israeli flag, we in the Canada Palestine Association-Vancouver would not consider this an anti-Semitic gesture. We do not equate Judaism with Zionism, nor do we equate all Jews with Israel. The Israeli flag represents the Israeli government, not all the Jewish people, and is being burned in many places around the world along with the U.S. flag. Is burning the U.S. flag anti-Christian or burning the Saudi or Iranian flag anti-Muslim? In fact, there is an Orthodox Jewish group, the Neturei Karta, that regularly burns the Israeli flag as a form of protest. Here they are in New York, Canada and Jerusalem. Is this also anti-Semitic?
Additionally, it should be noted that for Palestinian youth in the occupied West Bank, for example, the Israeli flag on the military jeeps that come screeching into their villages and homes represents only one thing – brutal oppression.

We feel the complaint you received is without basis, and is simply being used to obscure this latest infamy by both the U.S. and Israel against the legitimate and national rights of the Palestinian people. Furthermore, we find it distressing and ironic that your media only decides to pay attention to local Palestinian or pro-Palestinian protests when Israel advocacy groups or individuals make these unfounded complaints.

Hanna Kawas
Chairperson, Canada Palestine Association

Article in Palestine Chronicle

Exposing Real Friends and Enemies of Israel in the Arab World

The Israeli Institute for National Security Studies has just issued its… Read more

The Israeli Institute for National Security Studies has just issued its 275 page report entitled “Strategic Survey for Israel 2016-2017”. This Israeli research institute and think tank is headed by former IDF Military Intelligence Chief, General (ret.) Amos Yadlin. Its analysis offers a valuable insight into the how the Israeli intelligence and security community view and prioritize developments regionally and globally, and in the process, also exposes who are the real friends and enemies of Israel in the Arab world.

Following are a small sampling of the findings and the recommendations (labelled “challenges and responses”) contained in the report’s summarized conclusion:

* “Israel’s peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan have withstood the tumult in the Arab world. The Cairo and Amman embassies in Tel Aviv are an expression of a stable element in the regional system, and constitute an important part of Israel’s strategic position.” Page 252

* “The change in Saudi policy has expanded Riyadh’s base of shared interests with Israel, thereby facilitating closer ties between the two countries and possibly encouraging Saudi Arabia to make those ties public.” Page 252

* “From Israel’s standpoint, the non-state actors in the region are deeply involved in fighting for their existence, making them less able to concentrate on the struggle against Israel mandated by their ideology. The Islamic State branch that controls territory bordering Israel in the Golan Heights is for the most part inactive against Israel.” Page 249

* “Although Hezbollah continues its military buildup and poses a significant strategic threat to Israel, and despite the substantial resources invested by Hamas in rebuilding its military force, Israel’s overall strategic position gives it unprecedented freedom of action to initiate military operations aimed at preserving its security interests and restricting the increase in quality of its enemies’ military buildup.” page 250

* “The complete standstill in the political process and the deterioration of security in the Palestinian arena continued in 2016, and Israel continues to pay a price in lives, and in its economy, international standing, and internal political arena.” Page 253

* “Israel’s image in Western countries continues to decline, a trend that enhances the ability of hostile groups to engage in actions aimed at depriving Israel of moral and political legitimacy and launch boycotts in various areas. Indeed, the international campaign to delegitimize Israel continues, as reflected in the BDS movement. Israel’s current right wing government has contributed to this deterioration.” page 254

* “… the worst scenario is a conflict with Hezbollah on the border with Lebanon. Conflicts in the Gaza Strip will probably be limited, and Israel is well equipped to deal with them.” Page 255

The Recommendations:

– “Even if there does not appear to be a partner on the Palestinian side for reaching or implementing an agreement, Israel has an important interest in halting the gradual drift toward an irreversible one-state situation, and instead, progressing toward a two-state situation that ends Israel’s rule over Palestinians, while carefully maintaining and even improving Israel’s security.” Page 257

– “Israel must prepare measures against Lebanon’s national infrastructure without distinguishing it from Hezbollah, and develop capabilities for a ground campaign…” Page 259

– “Against Hamas in the Gaza Strip, military preparation should aim to shorten the duration of the next campaign and anticipate the tactical and systemic surprises that will be encountered.” Page 259

– “Both arenas, against Hamas and Hezbollah, should be discussed with the Trump administration, with understandings reached about Israel’s red lines, and about what will be considered a legitimate policy on the use of force against these groups in the event of another military conflict.” Page 259

– “The dialogue between Israel and Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states indicates that an effective process with the Palestinians, even if it does not include negotiations for a permanent settlement ending in a full agreement, will make a breakthrough in relations with the Gulf states possible, including making these relations public.” page 260

– “Israel can expect conflicts in both the military sphere and in soft power areas – economics, diplomacy, communications, the social networks, and the courts (lawfare)…It is therefore necessary for Israel to devise organizational frameworks, strategies, and multidimensional, coordinated methods to handle the challenges facing it.” Page 260

This article was first published by palestinechronicle.com

Is Tunisian Security Complicit in the Murder of Palestinian Leaders?

What are the connections and similarities between the assassinations of Mohammed Zawahri and Abu Jihad?
Article published by the Palestine Chronicle.

On Dec. 15, 2016, Tunisian Mohammad al-Zawahri, a Hamas leader and flight engineer specializing in unmanned aerial vehicles, was assassinated in the Tunisian city of Sfax. This operation bore eerie similarities to another assassination 28 years earlier of prominent Palestinian leader and high-ranking Fateh official Khalil Al Wazir (popularly known as Abu Jihad).

According to Gideon Levy in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz on Dec. 22, “Back in 1988, not far from the place where Zawahri was murdered, Israel murdered Abu Jihad in front of his wife and children in an operation given the poetic name ‘Show of Force’. Its perpetrators, from the elite Sayeret Matkal unit, boasted of it for years afterward.

Israeli investigative journalist Ronen Bergman, a recognized expert on the Israeli Mossad, wrote in an opinion article in the Ynetnews on Dec. 19, 2016:

If the Mossad is indeed behind the assassination of Hamas aviation engineer Mohammad al-Zawahri in Tunisia, as reported by the foreign press, this is the first assassination attributed to the Israeli intelligence organization under Cohen’s leadership (or perhaps the second: Omar Zayed of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine died under mysterious circumstances in Bulgaria).

Bergman also acknowledged in that same article that:

“Tunisia is what the Mossad calls a ‘soft target’ state…not an actual enemy state” and also noted that “The people arrested in Tunisia were likely not involved and will be released soon.

Four years ago, the Times of Israel reported on Nov. 1, 2012 that:
Yedioth Ahronoth investigative reporter Ronen Bergman’s interview with Nahum Lev, the commander of the operation and the officer who killed Abu Jihad, was cleared for publication…after being blocked by the military censor for more than a decade. The interview was conducted prior to Lev’s death from a car accident in August 2000. In allowing its publication, Israel essentially confirmed the open secret that it carried out the operation.

Was the Tunisian Security establishment complicit in both these assassination operations?

Following is some of the most relevant background information:

* Zine El Abidine Ben Ali came to power in Tunisia on November 7, 1987 in a bloodless coup d’état against then President Habib Bourguiba in questionable and suspicious circumstances.

* In his early days, Zine El Abidine Ben Ali was awarded training at the “Senior Intelligence School in Maryland and the School for Anti-Aircraft Field Artillery in Texas.”

* In 1987, the new Tunisian security chief Abderrahmane Balhaj Ali, “accompanied Ben Ali to Carthage at the time of his assumption of power as general director of the presidential security”, a position he continued to hold for 14 years.

* On April 16, 1988, just a few months after Ben Ali became President, Abu Jihad was assassinated by the Mossad. In 1993, David Yallop, the British investigative journalist, in his book “To the Ends of the Earth”, exposed the complicity of the U.S. and Tunisian governments in the murder of Abu Jihad. He noted: “The ‘High Backing’ also included the President of Tunis, Ben Ali, and the United States government, specifically the State Department.” (Page 224)

* On February 7, 2011, after the Tunisian popular revolution that ousted Ben Ali and his cohorts, Canada Palestine Association sent a letter to the Tunisian Ambassador to Canada, regarding the murder of Palestinian Leader Abu Jihad entitled “Bring Ben Ali and his Police and Intelligence Officers to Justice“. To this date, we have NOT received any response, not even an acknowledgement of receipt of the letter.

* Times of Israel reported on Nov. 5, 2012 that the Tunisian “Wafa movement announced…that it intended to sue Israel in a Tunis court over its involvement in the killing of Fatah official Khalil Al-Wazir (Abu Jihad)…Fadira Najjar, an attorney and member of Wafa, told Tunisian television that the assassination was perpetrated on Tunisian soil and is considered a war crime under international law. Najjar claimed that deposed Tunisian president Zine El-Abidine Bin Ali colluded with Israel in the killing, along with security officials.” It is worth noting that a Ynetnews story on this same subject did not refer to Tunisian “security officials” that were involved in the murder of Abu Jihad.

* A year ago, Balhaj Ali was resurrected to again head the Tunisian security apparatus and on Dec. 2, 2015, Jeune Afrique reported that he is “the new strong man of the services of the Tunisian police. His appointment is accompanied by a series of changes in the security apparatus…

* On Dec. 16, 2016 Ynetnews reported his sudden resignation this way: “Five hours after the assassination (of al-Zawahri), the Tunisian National Security Commissioner, Abed al-Rahman Balhaj Ali, announced his resignation without specifying why. Political sources in Tunisia have not ruled out the possibility that the resignation came against the backdrop of the assassination.

* Haaretz also reported on Dec. 18, 2016 that “Foreign elements were behind the assassination of a Hamas drone expert last Thursday, Tunisia announced on Sunday evening, following allegations that the engineer’s death was orchestrated by Israel’s Mossad.

All of these facts raise many serious and troubling questions:

* What is the “Senior Intelligence School in Maryland”? Is it similar to the “School of the Americas(Assassins)“? Is it tied to the CIA? Does it train and recruit foreign nationals as CIA agents? Was Ben Ali recruited to the CIA? Did the Tunisian government knew of Ben Ali’s activities?

* What does Abderrahmane Balhaj Ali know about the 1987 Tunisian coup d’état? Was he ever questioned by the Tunisian governments that followed Ben Ali’s Government and did he have any role in the Abu Jihad assassination? Was he ever questioned about what he did know “as general director of the presidential security” about the murder of Abu Jihad?

* Why did Balhaj Ali resign five hours after the assassination of al-Zawahri? You would think that the “Tunisian National Security Commissioner” would want to investigate and expose the assassins!

* What are the connections and similarities between the assassinations of Mohammed Zawahri and Abu Jihad? And, more importantly, would exposing and convicting the Tunisian security and police officials who were complicit in Abu Jihad’s murder have prevented the murder of al-Zawahri?

* Why did the Tunisian government blame Zawahri’s assassination only on “foreign elements”? Was Israeli journalist Bergman right when he stated “The people arrested in Tunisia were likely not involved”? And were those people scapegoats, to protect higher ranking Tunisian officials that were involved?

* Why does the Mossad consider Tunisia a “soft target” state? And why does the current Tunisian government insist on ignoring popular and parliamentary demands to penalize any normalization with Israel?

* And the most crucial point: Is the current Tunisian government willing or capable of appointing a National Security Commissioner that serves the Tunisian and Arab peoples and has no ties or allegiance to the CIA, Mossad, Italian or French security services?

* Why does Saudi Arabia harbor and protect the deposed Tunisian leader Ben Ali, who has been convicted in absentia on multiple counts by Tunisian courts, thereby thwarting justice? Why is Saudi Arabia giving refuge to this murderer with Tunisian and Arab blood on his hands?

* And finally, why are the Fateh leadership and its Palestinian Authority security forces not actively investigating and bringing to justice the murderers of Abu Jihad and Yasser Arafat, rather than chasing after those who oppose and resist the Israeli enemy?

To have genuine justice for the many Palestinians and Arabs who have been murdered in cold blood by the Israeli Mossad, we need to also “clean house” and expose and prosecute all those complicit in such crimes, especially those still in power.

The ‘Arab spring’ that was started in Tunisia in December 2010, will surely continue until it accomplishes its objectives in bringing freedom, democracy and independence to the Arab nation and peoples.

This article was first published by the PalestineChronicle.com.

In Canada, BDS loses in the House of Commons but wins on university campuses

The following article by CPA member Marion Kawas was published by Mondoweiss… Read more

The following article by CPA member Marion Kawas was published by Mondoweiss on February 25, 2016.
—————————————————————————————————–

In Canada, BDS loses in the House of Commons but wins on university campuses

So the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions BDS movement had a big day on Monday, Feb. 22, 2016 in Canada, both in the House of Commons and on university campuses.

Within a few hours of each other, Canadian politicians voted 229-51 to condemn BDS and even individuals who promote it; then the Students Society at McGill, a leading university in Montreal, voted to support BDS. An interesting irony here is that the new Canadian PM, Justin Trudeau is an alum of McGill and even personally condemned the efforts to support BDS at McGill when it was first introduced a year ago.

Lets deal with the motion in the House of Commons first (not yet a bill but it was made clear that’s where some MPs would like to see it go). It was introduced (not surprisingly) by the opposition Conservative party, the same party that governed Canada for the previous 10 years and were incredibly staunch supporters of Israel. It stated:

“That, given Canada and Israel share a long history of friendship as well as economic and diplomatic relations, the House reject the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, which promotes the demonization and delegitimization of the State of Israel, and call upon the government to condemn any and all attempts by Canadian organizations, groups or individuals to promote the BDS movement, both here at home and abroad”.

Note particularly the inclusion of “individuals” in the condemnation phrase. So of course the Conservative Party supported the motion overwhelmingly. And those who had voted in the new Liberal government hoping for change were immensely disappointed as it was announced (and followed through with) that the government would also support the motion. Three brave Liberal MPs did actually vote against it and others abstained. But the logic of the Liberal Party as to why they were supporting it was a real lesson in political double-speak and illogic.

The new Foreign Minister, Stephan Dion, when commenting on the wording of the motion in the debate in the Parliament, which happened several days before the actual vote, stated that … “this rhetoric elicits mistrust and it comes from the Conservatives, who in recent years have constantly tried to transform support for Israel into a partisan issue in Canada.” But then also said “We must oppose anything that stands in the way of stronger ties between Canada and Israel”.

As Neil McDonald, a veteran CBC journalist, noted in a wry commentary about the debate and Minister Dion’s comments:

“There is also, added the minister, the small matter of freedom of speech and debate. Dion denounced the Conservatives’ opposition day motion…as just more “politics of division.”

The Tories, he said, are just “bullies” who want to turn the defence of Israel into a partisan issue. They’ll portray anyone who votes against their motion as “dissidents.”

‘It’s not us who wrote this motion,’ Dion complained, ‘but we have to vote yes or no.’
So, um, yes. Reluctantly, yes.”

The take-away message from the official Liberal position was something like this: yes, this motion infringes on freedom of expression, we are against that, but we’re going to support it anyway to show our support for Israel. Really?! So support for a foreign country or government is more important than the right of free speech in Canada and upholding the Charter of Rights? Would this approach apply in all cases, or just when it comes to Israel?

Now, the position of the New Democratic Party, who did vote against the motion along with the Bloc Quebecois, was summarized like this during the debate by one of their MPs, Charlie Angus:

“Mr. Speaker, To be clear, we are not debating issues of racism and anti-Semitism.
That is not what this is about. This is about a political tactic and whether we agree with that political tactic or not.
The House, supported by the Liberal government of the day, is supporting actions for the government to condemn any attempts made by individuals or organizations.”

Right on, and words we could get behind and cheer for if this wasn’t the same party that purged some of their own candidates for speaking out on this issue back in August 2015 during a heated election campaign. It would seem that the issue of Palestinians rights and lives is a political football in Canada (the Greens being the one exception). We must content ourselves with accepting whatever limited crumbs are thrown our way whenever it suits the prevailing winds and are criticized if we’re not grateful.

Lets go back to the Student Society at McGill. The McGill BDS Action Network had submitted a resolution calling on the Student Society to:

“stand in support of BDS campaigns and to recommend to the Board that McGill divest entirely of all its holdings in companies that profit from the occupation, as well as implement a screening mechanism that would prevent future investments in similar companies. The motion will specifically support the campaign for McGill to divest from corporations that profit from the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. These corporations include Re/Max Holdings Inc., whose Israeli subsidiary sells real estate in settlements throughout the West Bank, and Mizrahi-Tefahot Bank, which has financed settlement construction projects and provides mortgages to homebuyers in settlements. A third company, L-3 Communications Inc., has supplied equipment to Israeli checkpoints, signed contracts with the Israeli Ministry of Defense for the production and remanufacture of tank engines, and developed the Hermes 900 drone with Elbit systems, used for the first time in Operation Protective Edge in 2014.”

The motion passed with 512 in favour, 357 opposed and 14 abstentions. This represents the future and embodies all our hopes for justice for the Palestinians. The Canadian House of Commons, alternately, reminds of the opposite.

The main lesson here for activists is that only effective grassroots organizing will really help the Palestinian people in their struggle and intensifying BDS work is part of that effort. The efforts and ultimate success by the McGill BDS Action Network is just one positive example of that, although the pushback from the Zionist lobby has already begun and surely will continue. But the hard work of networking and maintaining BDS campaigns have proven to be the best strategy for international supporters who want to see the Palestinians be able to live in freedom and dignity.