Iranian Pastor Sentenced to Death: Nadarkhani Refuses to Convert

By Daniel D. Tovrov
IBT
September 29, 2011 10:35 AM EDT

Iranian Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani, who is facing the death penalty, again refused to convert to Islam to save his life.

Nadarkhani was arrested in 2009 for the crime of apostasy because he allegedly abandoned Islam for Christianity. As a pastor, Iranian clerics believe that Nadarkhani was preaching in order to convert Muslims.

Before his last hearing Wednesday, Nadarkhani had been given three previous chances to repent, and all three times he has refused. After his final refusal Wednesday, no verdict has been announced, but many expect that he could be put to death as soon as Friday.

The case has slowly garnered international attention, and there are a number of Christian rights groups advocating for his release.

U.S. House Speaker John Boehner also has spoken out against Iran. "While Iran's government claims to promote tolerance, it continues to imprison many of its people because of their faith. This goes beyond the law to an issue of fundamental respect for human dignity. I urge Iran's leaders to abandon this dark path, spare [Nadarkhani's] life, and grant him a full and unconditional release," said Boehner.

There were rumors on Wednesday night that Nadarkhani's execution sentence was to be waived after the final trial, but contradicting reports indicate that the news was incorrect.

"We've had some reports that there has been a verbal announcement from the court in Iran that the sentence is annulled but we urge caution," said Christian Solidarity Worldwide, a religious group campaigning for Nadarkhani's release.

"It's been known that verbal announcements have been directly contradicted by later written statements. We are still calling for international pressure to be kept up."

The American Center for Law and Justice said in a message titled "Troubling News" that the rumors were spread by the Iranian secret service in an attempt to get the media to stop reporting the story. ACLJ said Nadarkhani's lawyer Mohammad Ali Dadkhah called the center Wednesday to say the death sentence hasn't been overturned.

Even if the sentence were commuted, Nadarkhani could still face life in prison. And even if he were released, there would still be danger.

"In Iran about 18 years ago, they had released a pastor, but then came and assassinated him and his bishop later. We cannot stop the pressure," Pastor Firouz Sadegh-Khandjani, a Member of the Council of Elders for the Church of Iran, told the ACLJ.

Between June 2010 and January 2011, more than 200 people in Iran were arrested for their religious beliefs, according to Elam Ministries, a United Kingdom-based church with ties to Iran.

In August, a pastor named Haghnejad was arrested for the third time, according to Christian Solidarity. Police also confiscated 6,500 bibles, which Iran's social issues committee deemed were being used to deceive youths.

While no one has been hanged for the crime of apostasy in Iran for more than 20 years, the country has the second highest execution rate of any nation in the world. So far in 2011, there have been about 400 executions, a quarter of which occurred in September.

China executes the most people. The U.S. is ranked number 5. But persecuting and killing Christians by Muslims following Quran doctrine shows the true religious intolerance of Muhammad's Islam. The world awaits a better Islam, one where Muslims actually do practice a religion of peace as Ahmadiyah Muslims do today.

Merkel questions new Israeli settlements

(AP) – 2 hours ago

BERLIN (AP) — German Chancellor Angela Merkel has told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that the decision to green-light new Jewish housing units in east Jerusalem has "raised doubts that the Israeli government is interested in starting serious negotiations" with the Palestinians, her spokesman said Friday.

Steffen Seibert said in a statement that Merkel called Netanyahu to tell him "it is now necessary to dispel those doubts."

Seibert said Merkel told Netanyahu it is important to start negotiations "as soon as possible" on a two-state solution and that in the meantime both sides must refrain from "provocative acts."

Germany enjoys close relations with both Israel and the Palestinians, and has been frequently involved in acting as a neutral party to help negotiations between the two sides.

Merkel has also been a strong supporter of the need for a negotiated two-state solution.

But in the latest setback, Israel announced Tuesday that it has approved the new construction in the Jewish neighborhood of Gilo in southeast Jerusalem. The Palestinians condemned the plan, and the U.S., European Union and United Nations all swiftly expressed their disappointment over the settlements, which raised already heightened tensions after last week's Palestinian move to seek U.N. membership.

The Palestinians have demanded that Israel halt all settlement construction in east Jerusalem, which the Palestinians claim as their future capital, and the adjacent West Bank — territories captured by Israel in the 1967 Mideast war — as a condition for resuming peace talks.

Since capturing east Jerusalem, Israel has annexed the area and ringed it with about 10 Jewish enclaves that are meant to solidify its control. Gilo, which is close to the Palestinian city of Bethlehem, is among the largest, with about 50,000 residents. Israel's annexation of east Jerusalem has not been internationally recognized.

Copyright © 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

From Mazin Qumsiyeh: Call to action: Waters for Life in Palestine

Call to action: Waters for Life in Palestine

http://popular-resistance.blogspot.com/2011/09/waters-for-life-in-palestine.
html

>From its founding Israel as an apartheid colonial power has appropriated
natural resources from native people to use for immigrants imported from
around the world. Before 1967, Israel diverted waters that normally flowed
into the Jordan river basin and also restricted water usage by the
Palestinians who remained in what became the state of Israel in 1948. After
1967, Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza were denied access to most of
their water resources in a calculated process to impoverish the population
and destroy the economy in the occupied Palestinian territories. Today,
Palestinian are allowed to use an average of 72 liters per capita per day
versus Israeli average of 280 liters versus settlers in the West Bank
average of 400 liters daily. For some communities of Palestinians like
those in area C including the Jordan Valley, the situation is worse as
Israel routinely destroys their sources of water.

The international community and local Palestinians are called to work
together to address this system of inequality through direct positive
actions. The Palestinian Center for Rapprochement Between People, the
Applied Research Institute- Jerusalem, and the Palestine Justice Network
have jointly proposed a plan of action for activists interested in helping
us to ameliorate the water situation and also challenge the Israeli policies
and practices via non-violent methods of resistance. We call you to join us
by:

a) Donating towards rehabilitation of existing ancient wells and cisterns.
While most labor will be via volunteers and owners of the wells and
cisterns, there is need for purchasing cement, gravel, ladders, and other
building supplies to implement this project. To donate, please go to
http://www.pcr.ps/read/donate-pcr or http://www.imemc.org/donate and specify
in your donation that it is for the "Waters for life". Other portals for
receiving donations will soon be opened, and the transaction details for
these portals will be forthcoming. The more money we receive, the more well
and cistern rehabilitation/protection projects we will be able to perform.
All collected money will be spent only on this water project

b) Coming to Palestine to help directly with your labor to rehabilitate old
wells. You can arrive at anytime but you may want to coordinate arrival for
our week of action focused on land and water beginning March 30th (email to
info@palestinejn.org to get details)

c) Join our international advocacy group and publicize the water situation
via pressure on governments and reaching out to others via mainstream and
alternative media (share any letters you write with us at
media@palestinejn.org ).

To implement this project, we created a local committee composed of
activists knowledgeable in the area who laid out plans not only for
rehabilitation of wells but also for their protection from Israeli
destruction through legal and direct action methods. A project coordinator
was selected from ARIJ and donations towards this project will be set-up in
a separate account in PCR.

Resources
http://www.ewash.org
http://www.btselem.org/water/consumption_gap
http://www.btselem.org/jordan_valley/water
http://www.arij.org/publications(2)/papers/2007%20Status%20of%20Environment.
pdf
http://www.arij.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=330&Itemid=
62
http://www.arij.org/publications(5)/Papers/2009/Survey%20and%20assessment%20
of%20ancient%20Cisterns%20in%20the%20West%20Bank.pdf

About ARIJ: Founded in 1990, the Applied Research Institute of Jerusalem
(ARIJ) is a non-profit organization dedicated to promoting sustainable
development and the self-reliance of the Palestinian people through greater
control over their natural resources. ARIJ has more than 19 years of
organizational experience in the fields of natural resources management,
water management, and environmental management. ARIJ plays an active role in
the local community as an advocate for greater co-operation among local
institutions as well as international and non-governmental organizations. In
its capacity as a research institute, ARIJ focuses on its applied approach
to projects which contribute to sustainable development, on one hand, and
finding solutions to community problems, such as providing safe access to
water and sanitation ; better management and utilization of land, water and
other natural resources, self-reliance and empowerment of the people, on the
other hand.

Waters for Life in Palestine
Back to Messages
From: "Mazin Qumsiyeh"

About PCR: The Palestinian Center for Rapprochement between Peoples (PCR)
was founded in 1988. Its mission is to promote, develop and implement
unarmed civilian peacekeeping as a tool for reducing violence and protecting
civilians in situations of violent conflict. We work to bridge the gap
between Palestinians and people from all around the world, informing the
public about the reality in Palestine, and empowering the community through
nonviolent direct action. Our Goals are: 1) Promote arriving at a just and
peaceful Palestine, 2) Promote harmony and rapprochement within society and
between societies, 3) Raise awareness Provide accurate and first hand
information about Palestine, and 4) Enhance civic duty and civic
responsibility especially for empowering youth, women, and for marginalized
segments of our society. PCR activists co-founded the International
Solidarity movement which was headquartered at PCR for the first 5 years.

About Palestine Justice Network (PJN) and Welcome to Palestine (WTP)
Campaign: PJN mission is to build a global network of activists and
organizations that work together in advocacy in order to support the goals
set forth by the Palestinian Civil Society Call to Action 2005. WTP has
hosted internationals in support of this mission and to do exploratory and
support missions to Palestine for example during Christmas 2010 and the
attempt to arrive by the hundreds in July 2011. See http://palestinejn.org

Why Fewer Young American Jews Share Their Parents' View of Israel

Benjamin Resnick, a student at The Rabbinical School of The Jewish Theological Seminary in New York, New York. Lauren Fleishman for TIME

By Dana Goldstein Thursday, Sept. 29, 201
Time World

"I'm trembling," my mother says, when I tell her I'm working on an article about how younger and older American Jews are reacting differently to the Palestinians' bid for statehood at the United Nations. I understand the frustrations of the Palestinians dealing with ongoing settlements construction and sympathize with their decision to approach the U.N., but my mom supports President Obama's promise to wield the U.S. veto, sharing his view that a two-state solution can be achieved only through negotiations with Israel.

"This is so emotional," she says as we cautiously discuss our difference of opinion. "It makes me feel absolutely terrible when you stridently voice criticisms of Israel." (See photos inside the West Bank settlements.)

A lump of guilt and sadness rises in my throat. I've written harshly of Israel's invasion of Lebanon in 2006 and its assault on Gaza in 2009, and on civil rights issues in Israel. But speaking my mind on these topics — a very Jewish thing to do — has never been easy. During my childhood in the New York suburbs, support for Israel was as fundamental a family tradition as voting Democratic or lighting the Shabbos candles on Friday night.

My mom has a masters degree in Jewish history and is the program director of a large synagogue. Her youthful Israel experiences, volunteering on a kibbutz and meeting descendants of great-grandmother's siblings, were part of my own mythology. Raised within the Conservative movement, I learned at Hebrew school that Israel was the "land of milk and honey" where Holocaust survivors had irrigated the deserts and made flowers bloom.

What I didn't hear much about was the lives of Palestinians. It was only after I went to college, met Muslim friends, and enrolled in a Middle Eastern history and politics course that I was challenged to reconcile my liberal, humanist worldview with the fact that the Jewish state of which I was so proud was occupying the land of 4.4 million stateless Palestinians, many of them refugees displaced by Israel's creation. (See TIME's photoessay on growing up Arab in Israel.)

Like many young American Jews, during my senior year of college I took the free trip to Israel offered by the Taglit-Birthright program. The bliss I felt floating in the Dead Sea, sampling succulent fruits grown by Jewish farmers, and roaming the medieval city of Safed, historic center of Kabbalah mysticism, was tempered by other experiences: Watching the construction of the imposing "security fence," which not only tamped down on terrorist attacks, but also separated Palestinian villagers from their lands and water supplies. I spent hours in hushed conversation with a young Israeli soldier who was horrified by what he said was the routinely rough and contemptuous treatment of Palestinian civilians at Israeli military checkpoints.

That trip deepened my conviction that as an American Jew, I could no longer in good conscience offer Israel unquestioning support. I'm not alone. Polling of young American Jews shows that with the exception of the Orthodox, many of us feel less attached to Israel than do our Baby Boomer parents, who came of age during the era of the 1967 and 1973 wars, when Israel was less of an aggressor and more a victim. A 2007 poll by Steven Cohen of Hebrew Union College and Ari Kelman of UC Davis found that although the majority of American Jews of all ages continue to identify as "Pro-Israel," those under 35 are less likely to identify as "Zionist." Over 40 percent of American Jews under 35 believe that "Israel occupies land belonging to someone else," and over 30 percent report sometimes feeling "ashamed" of Israel's actions.

The U.S. is LEGALLY REQUIRED TO SUPPORT Palestinians in their bid for international recognition.

United Nations Declaration on the Rights of
Indigenous Peoples

Adopted by General Assembly Resolution 61/295 on 13 September 2007

The General Assembly,
Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and good faith in the fulfilment of the obligations assumed by States in accordance with the Charter,

Affirming that indigenous peoples are equal to all other peoples, while recognizing the right of all peoples to be different, to consider themselves different, and to be respected as such,

Affirming also that all peoples contribute to the diversity and richness of civilizations and cultures, which constitute the common heritage of humankind,

Affirming further that all doctrines, policies and practices based on or advocating superiority of peoples or individuals on the basis of national origin or racial, religious, ethnic or cultural differences are racist, scientifically false, legally invalid, morally condemnable and socially unjust,

Reaffirming that indigenous peoples, in the exercise of their rights, should be free from discrimination of any kind,

Concerned that indigenous peoples have suffered from historic injustices as a result of, inter alia, their colonization and dispossession of their lands, territories and resources, thus preventing them from exercising, in particular, their right to development in accordance with their own needs and interests,

Recognizing the urgent need to respect and promote the inherent rights of indigenous peoples which derive from their political, economic and social structures and from their cultures, spiritual traditions, histories and philosophies, especially their rights to their lands, territories and resources,

Recognizing also the urgent need to respect and promote the rights of indigenous peoples affirmed in treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements with States,

Welcoming the fact that indigenous peoples are organizing themselves for political, economic, social and cultural enhancement and in order to bring to an end all forms of discrimination and oppression wherever they occur,

Convinced that control by indigenous peoples over developments affecting them and their lands, territories and resources will enable them to maintain and strengthen their institutions, cultures and traditions, and to promote their development in accordance with their aspirations and needs,

Recognizing that respect for indigenous knowledge, cultures and traditional practices contributes to sustainable and equitable development and proper management of the environment,

Emphasizing the contribution of the demilitarization of the lands and territories of indigenous peoples to peace, economic and social progress and development, understanding and friendly relations among nations and peoples of the world,

Recognizing in particular the right of indigenous families and communities to retain shared responsibility for the upbringing, training, education and well-being of their children, consistent with the rights of the child,

Considering that the rights affirmed in treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements between States and indigenous peoples are, in some situations, matters of international concern, interest, responsibility and character,

Considering also that treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements, and the relationship they represent, are the basis for a strengthened partnership between indigenous peoples and States,

Acknowledging that the Charter of the United Nations, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (2) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,2 as well as the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action,(3) affirm the fundamental importance of the right to self-determination of all peoples, by virtue of which they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development,

Bearing in mind that nothing in this Declaration may be used to deny any peoples their right to self-determination, exercised in conformity with international law,

Convinced that the recognition of the rights of indigenous peoples in this Declaration will enhance harmonious and cooperative relations between the State and indigenous peoples, based on principles of justice, democracy, respect for human rights, non-discrimination and good faith,

Encouraging States to comply with and effectively implement all their obligations as they apply to indigenous peoples under international instruments, in particular those related to human rights, in consultation and cooperation with the peoples concerned,

Emphasizing that the United Nations has an important and continuing role to play in promoting and protecting the rights of indigenous peoples,

Believing that this Declaration is a further important step forward for the recognition, promotion and protection of the rights and freedoms of indigenous peoples and in the development of relevant activities of the United Nations system in this field,

Recognizing and reaffirming that indigenous individuals are entitled without discrimination to all human rights recognized in international law, and that indigenous peoples possess collective rights which are indispensable for their existence, well-being and integral development as peoples,

Recognizing that the situation of indigenous peoples varies from region to region and from country to country and that the significance of national and regional particularities and various historical and cultural backgrounds should be taken into consideration,

Solemnly proclaims the following United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as a standard of achievement to be pursued in a spirit of partnership and mutual respect:

Article 1
Indigenous peoples have the right to the full enjoyment, as a collective or as individuals, of all human rights and fundamental freedoms as recognized in the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights(4) and international human rights law.

Article 2
Indigenous peoples and individuals are free and equal to all other peoples and individuals and have the right to be free from any kind of discrimination, in the exercise of their rights, in particular that based on their indigenous origin or identity.

Article 3
Indigenous peoples have the right to self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

Article 4
Indigenous peoples, in exercising their right to self-determination, have the right to autonomy or self-government in matters relating to their internal and local affairs, as well as ways and means for financing their autonomous functions.

Article 5
Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and strengthen their distinct political, legal, economic, social and cultural institutions, while retaining their right to participate fully, if they so choose, in the political, economic, social and cultural life of the State.

Article 6
Every indigenous individual has the right to a nationality.

Article 7
1. Indigenous individuals have the rights to life, physical and mental integrity, liberty and security of person.
2. Indigenous peoples have the collective right to live in freedom, peace and security as distinct peoples and shall not be subjected to any act of genocide or any other act of violence, including forcibly removing children of the group to another group.

Article 8
1. Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right not to be subjected to forced assimilation or destruction of their culture.
2. States shall provide effective mechanisms for prevention of, and redress for:
(a) Any action which has the aim or effect of depriving them of their integrity as distinct peoples, or of their cultural values or ethnic identities;
(b) Any action which has the aim or effect of dispossessing them of their lands, territories or resources;
(c) Any form of forced population transfer which has the aim or effect of violating or undermining any of their rights;
(d) Any form of forced assimilation or integration;
(e) Any form of propaganda designed to promote or incite racial or ethnic discrimination directed against them.

Article 9
Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right to belong to an indigenous community or nation, in accordance with the traditions and customs of the community or nation concerned. No discrimination of any kind may arise from the exercise of such a right.

Article 10
Indigenous peoples shall not be forcibly removed from their lands or territories. No relocation shall take place without the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous peoples concerned and after agreement on just and fair compensation and, where possible, with the option of return.

Article 11
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to practise and revitalize their cultural traditions and customs. This includes the right to maintain, protect and develop the past, present and future manifestations of their cultures, such as archaeological and historical sites, artefacts, designs, ceremonies, technologies and visual and performing arts and literature.
2. States shall provide redress through effective mechanisms, which may include restitution, developed in conjunction with indigenous peoples, with respect to their cultural, intellectual, religious and spiritual property taken without their free, prior and informed consent or in violation of their laws, traditions and customs.

Article 12
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to manifest, practise, develop and teach their spiritual and religious traditions, customs and ceremonies; the right to maintain, protect, and have access in privacy to their religious and cultural sites; the right to the use and control of their ceremonial objects; and the right to the repatriation of their human remains.
2. States shall seek to enable the access and/or repatriation of ceremonial objects and human remains in their possession through fair, transparent and effective mechanisms developed in conjunction with indigenous peoples concerned.

Article 13
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to revitalize, use, develop and transmit to future generations their histories, languages, oral traditions, philosophies, writing systems and literatures, and to designate and retain their own names for communities, places and persons.
2. States shall take effective measures to ensure that this right is protected and also to ensure that indigenous peoples can understand and be understood in political, legal and administrative proceedings, where necessary through the provision of interpretation or by other appropriate means.

Article 14
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to establish and control their educational systems and institutions providing education in their own languages, in a manner appropriate to their cultural methods of teaching and learning.
2. Indigenous individuals, particularly children, have the right to all levels and forms of education of the State without discrimination.
3. States shall, in conjunction with indigenous peoples, take effective measures, in order for indigenous individuals, particularly children, including those living outside their communities, to have access, when possible, to an education in their own culture and provided in their own language.

Article 15
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to the dignity and diversity of their cultures, traditions, histories and aspirations which shall be appropriately reflected in education and public information.
2. States shall take effective measures, in consultation and cooperation with the indigenous peoples concerned, to combat prejudice and eliminate discrimination and to promote tolerance, understanding and good relations among indigenous peoples and all other segments of society.

Article 16
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to establish their own media in their own languages and to have access to all forms of non-indigenous media without discrimination.
2. States shall take effective measures to ensure that State-owned media duly reflect indigenous cultural diversity. States, without prejudice to ensuring full freedom of expression, should encourage privately owned media to adequately reflect indigenous cultural diversity.

Article 17
1. Indigenous individuals and peoples have the right to enjoy fully all rights established under applicable international and domestic labour law.
2. States shall in consultation and cooperation with indigenous peoples take specific measures to protect indigenous children from economic exploitation and from performing any work that is likely to be hazardous or to interfere with the child’s education, or to be harmful to the child’s health or physical, mental, spiritual, moral or social development, taking into account their special vulnerability and the importance of education for their empowerment.
3. Indigenous individuals have the right not to be subjected to any discriminatory conditions of labour and, inter alia, employment or salary.

Article 18
Indigenous peoples have the right to participate in decision-making in matters which would affect their rights, through representatives chosen by themselves in accordance with their own procedures, as well as to maintain and develop their own indigenous decision-making institutions.

Article 19
States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the indigenous peoples concerned through their own representative institutions in order to obtain their free, prior and informed consent before adopting and implementing legislative or administrative measures that may affect them.

Article 20
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and develop their political, economic and social systems or institutions, to be secure in the enjoyment of their own means of subsistence and development, and to engage freely in all their traditional and other economic activities.
2. Indigenous peoples deprived of their means of subsistence and development are entitled to just and fair redress.

Article 21
1. Indigenous peoples have the right, without discrimination, to the improvement of their economic and social conditions, including, inter alia, in the areas of education, employment, vocational training and retraining, housing, sanitation, health and social security.
2. States shall take effective measures and, where appropriate, special measures to ensure continuing improvement of their economic and social conditions. Particular attention shall be paid to the rights and special needs of indigenous elders, women, youth, children and persons with disabilities.

Article 22
1. Particular attention shall be paid to the rights and special needs of indigenous elders, women, youth, children and persons with disabilities in the implementation of this Declaration.
2. States shall take measures, in conjunction with indigenous peoples, to ensure that indigenous women and children enjoy the full protection and guarantees against all forms of violence and discrimination.

Article 23
Indigenous peoples have the right to determine and develop priorities and strategies for exercising their right to development. In particular, indigenous peoples have the right to be actively involved in developing and determining health, housing and other economic and social programmes affecting them and, as far as possible, to administer such programmes through their own institutions.

Article 24
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to their traditional medicines and to maintain their health practices, including the conservation of their vital medicinal plants, animals and minerals. Indigenous individuals also have the right to access, without any discrimination, to all social and health services.
2. Indigenous individuals have an equal right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. States shall take the necessary steps with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of this right.

Article 25
Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and strengthen their distinctive spiritual relationship with their traditionally owned or otherwise occupied and used lands, territories, waters and coastal seas and other resources and to uphold their responsibilities to future generations in this regard.

Article 26
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired.
2. Indigenous peoples have the right to own, use, develop and control the lands, territories and resources that they possess by reason of traditional ownership or other traditional occupation or use, as well as those which they have otherwise acquired.
3. States shall give legal recognition and protection to these lands, territories and resources. Such recognition shall be conducted with due respect to the customs, traditions and land tenure systems of the indigenous peoples concerned.

Article 27
States shall establish and implement, in conjunction with indigenous peoples concerned, a fair, independent, impartial, open and transparent process, giving due recognition to indigenous peoples’ laws, traditions, customs and land tenure systems, to recognize and adjudicate the rights of indigenous peoples pertaining to their lands, territories and resources, including those which were traditionally owned or otherwise occupied or used. Indigenous peoples shall have the right to participate in this process.

Article 28
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to redress, by means that can include restitution or, when this is not possible, just, fair and equitable compensation, for the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned or otherwise occupied or used, and which have been confiscated, taken, occupied, used or damaged without their free, prior and informed consent.
2. Unless otherwise freely agreed upon by the peoples concerned, compensation shall take the form of lands, territories and resources equal in quality, size and legal status or of monetary compensation or other appropriate redress.

Article 29
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to the conservation and protection of the environment and the productive capacity of their lands or territories and resources. States shall establish and implement assistance programmes for indigenous peoples for such conservation and protection, without discrimination.
2. States shall take effective measures to ensure that no storage or disposal of hazardous materials shall take place in the lands or territories of indigenous peoples without their free, prior and informed consent.
3. States shall also take effective measures to ensure, as needed, that programmes for monitoring, maintaining and restoring the health of indigenous peoples, as developed and implemented by the peoples affected by such materials, are duly implemented.

Article 30
1. Military activities shall not take place in the lands or territories of indigenous peoples, unless justified by a relevant public interest or otherwise freely agreed with or requested by the indigenous peoples concerned.
2. States shall undertake effective consultations with the indigenous peoples concerned, through appropriate procedures and in particular through their representative institutions, prior to using their lands or territories for military activities.

Article 31
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions, as well as the manifestations of their sciences, technologies and cultures, including human and genetic resources, seeds, medicines, knowledge of the properties of fauna and flora, oral traditions, literatures, designs, sports and traditional games and visual and performing arts. They also have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their intellectual property over such cultural heritage, traditional knowledge, and traditional cultural expressions.
2. In conjunction with indigenous peoples, States shall take effective measures to recognize and protect the exercise of these rights.

Article 32
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to determine and develop priorities and strategies for the development or use of their lands or territories and other resources.
2. States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the indigenous peoples concerned through their own representative institutions in order to obtain their free and informed consent prior to the approval of any project affecting their lands or territories and other resources, particularly in connection with the development, utilization or exploitation of mineral, water or other resources.
3. States shall provide effective mechanisms for just and fair redress for any such activities, and appropriate measures shall be taken to mitigate adverse environmental, economic, social, cultural or spiritual impact.

Article 33
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to determine their own identity or membership in accordance with their customs and traditions. This does not impair the right of indigenous individuals to obtain citizenship of the States in which they live.
2. Indigenous peoples have the right to determine the structures and to select the membership of their institutions in accordance with their own procedures.

Article 34
Indigenous peoples have the right to promote, develop and maintain their institutional structures and their distinctive customs, spirituality, traditions, procedures, practices and, in the cases where they exist, juridical systems or customs, in accordance with international human rights standards.

Article 35
Indigenous peoples have the right to determine the responsibilities of individuals to their communities.

Article 36
1. Indigenous peoples, in particular those divided by international borders, have the right to maintain and develop contacts, relations and cooperation, including activities for spiritual, cultural, political, economic and social purposes, with their own members as well as other peoples across borders.
2. States, in consultation and cooperation with indigenous peoples, shall take effective measures to facilitate the exercise and ensure the implementation of this right.

Article 37
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to the recognition, observance and enforcement of treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements concluded with States or their successors and to have States honour and respect such treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements.
2. Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as diminishing or eliminating the rights of indigenous peoples contained in treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements.

Article 38
States in consultation and cooperation with indigenous peoples, shall take the appropriate measures, including legislative measures, to achieve the ends of this Declaration.

Article 39
Indigenous peoples have the right to have access to financial and technical assistance from States and through international cooperation, for the enjoyment of the rights contained in this Declaration.

Article 40
Indigenous peoples have the right to access to and prompt decision through just and fair procedures for the resolution of conflicts and disputes with States or other parties, as well as to effective remedies for all infringements of their individual and collective rights. Such a decision shall give due consideration to the customs, traditions, rules and legal systems of the indigenous peoples concerned and international human rights.

Article 41
The organs and specialized agencies of the United Nations system and other intergovernmental organizations shall contribute to the full realization of the provisions of this Declaration through the mobilization, inter alia, of financial cooperation and technical assistance. Ways and means of ensuring participation of indigenous peoples on issues affecting them shall be established.

Article 42
The United Nations, its bodies, including the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, and specialized agencies, including at the country level, and States shall promote respect for and full application of the provisions of this Declaration and follow up the effectiveness of this Declaration.

Article 43
The rights recognized herein constitute the minimum standards for the survival, dignity and well-being of the indigenous peoples of the world.

Article 44
All the rights and freedoms recognized herein are equally guaranteed to male and female indigenous individuals.

Article 45
Nothing in this Declaration may be construed as diminishing or extinguishing the rights indigenous peoples have now or may acquire in the future.

Article 46
1. Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, people, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act contrary to the Charter of the United Nations or construed as authorizing or encouraging any action which would dismember or impair, totally or in part, the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent States.
2. In the exercise of the rights enunciated in the present Declaration, human rights and fundamental freedoms of all shall be respected. The exercise of the rights set forth in this Declaration shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law and in accordance with international human rights obligations. Any such limitations shall be non-discriminatory and strictly necessary solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and for meeting the just and most compelling requirements of a democratic society.
3. The provisions set forth in this Declaration shall be interpreted in accordance with the principles of justice, democracy, respect for human rights, equality, non-discrimination, good governance and good faith.

(2) See resolution 2200 A (XXI), annex.

(3) A/CONF.157/24 (Part I), chap. III.

(4) Resolution 217 A (III).

President Obama signed the U.N. Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples on December 16, 2010. Palestinians are Indigenous Peoples. The U.S. is LEGALLY REQUIRED TO SUPPORT Palestinians in their bid for international recognition. Articles 3,4,5, and 6 require that the U.S. support Palestinians. Obama cannot veto their bid without breaking the U.S. agreement to support the rights of indigenous peoples.

Western powers angered as Israel agrees settler homes

Construction cranes in Gilo (January 2011) Gilo is built on land captured by Israel in 1967

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Israel's move could be seen as provocative

BBC News
27 September 2011
Last updated at 18:03 ET


Western powers have expressed dismay at Israeli plans to build 1,100 more homes on a settlement on Jerusalem's edge.

The US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called the move "counter-productive" to peace talks while the EU said the plan should be "reversed".

The announcement comes days after Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas called for full UN membership for a Palestinian state.

The new houses are to be constructed Israel at Gilo, in East Jerusalem.

Almost 500,000 Jews live in settlements on occupied territory. The settlements are illegal under international law, though Israel disputes this.

'Provocative'

US-brokered peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians are deadlocked over the issue of Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem.

Mrs Clinton said Israel's move would damage attempts to resume direct negotiations with the Palestinian Authority.

"We have long urged both sides to avoid any kind of action which could undermine trust, including, and perhaps most particularly, in Jerusalem, any action that could be viewed as provocative by either side," she said.

The European Union's Foreign Policy Chief Catherine Ashton told the EU parliament that she heard "with deep regret" that Israeli settlement plans were continuing.

"This plan should be reversed. Settlement activity threatens the viability of an agreed two-state solution and runs contrary to the Israeli-stated commitment to resume negotiations."

She said she would raise the issue with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu when she next met him.

"He should stop announcing them and, more importantly, stop building them," she said, adding that it was wrong to get people to live in a place from which they may have to move from after any negotiated settlement is achieved.

British Foreign Secretary William Hague too urged Israel to revoke its decision.

"Settlement expansion is illegal under international law, corrodes trust and undermines the basic principle of land for peace," he said in a statement.
'Nice gift'

The plan for construction in Gilo includes the construction of small housing units, public buildings, a school and an industrial zone, according to the Ynet news website.

“Settlement activity threatens the viability of an agreed two-state solution ”

Catherine Ashton EU Foreign Policy Chief

"It's a nice gift for Rosh Hashanah [Jewish New Year]," Yair Gabay, a member of the Jerusalem planning committee, told Ynet.

The authorities have now approved the building of almost 3,000 homes in Gilo over the past two years.

The chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said the decision represented a rejection of a proposal by the Quartet of Mid East negotiators - the US, the EU, Russia and the UN - for new talks between the Palestinians and Israelis, expected to be made officially on Friday.

"With this, Israel is responding to the Quartet's statement with 1,100 'NOs'," he said.

On Monday, a divided UN Security Council met behind closed doors for its first discussion of last week's Palestinian application for full state membership of the UN.

The request needs the support of nine of the 15 members of the council, but the US has said it will veto the bid.

'Discriminatory demolitions'

Israel built the settlement at Gilo on land it captured in 1967. It later annexed the area to the Jerusalem municipality in a move not recognised by the international community.

Israel says it does not consider areas within the Jerusalem municipality to be settlements.

Gilo lies across a narrow valley from the Palestinian village of Beit Jala. It became a target for militants during the second Palestinian uprising against Israeli occupation in 2000.

Meanwhile, the UN rapporteurs on housing, water, sanitation and food rights said there had been a "dramatic increase" in the demolitions this year.

"The impact and discriminatory nature of these demolitions and evictions is completely unacceptable," they said in a statement.

"These actions by the Israeli authorities violate human rights and humanitarian law and must end immediately."

Thousands protest against 'murderous' Israel in Turkey and Jordan

Demonstrators wave Palestinian flags during an anti-Israel protest before the Europa League soccer match between Turkey's Besiktas and Israel's Maccabi Tel Aviv soccer match, Istanbul, Sept. 15, 2011.
Photo by: Reuters

Haaretz News
Published 20:59 15.09.11
Latest update 20:59 15.09.11


In Istanbul, thousands gather outside a soccer stadium where Maccabi Tel Aviv is playing; dozens demonstrate in front of Israeli embassy in Amman.
By Haaretz

Thousands of Turkish protesters gathered outside the soccer stadium in Istanbul where Maccabi Tel Aviv was playing against Turkish team Beşiktaş, waving Hezbollah flags and chanting anti-Israel slogans. The protesters yelled "no passage for Zionists" and "Israel is a murderer, get out of Palestine."

Local police were deployed in large numbers around the area, and prevented protesters from reaching dozens of Israeli soccer fans who were seated in an isolated area. There were no violent incidents inside the stadium.

On Wednesday, Turkish police instructed the team to stay within hotel grounds and to leave only on guarded trips to practice and the game itself. Team spokesman Ofer Ronen told the local media "we trust the Turkish police to do their work faithfully."

Sports and Culture Minister Limor Livnat said she had talked with the authorities to beef up the team's security and would be continuously in touch with the private security company guarding the team.

Meanwhile, dozens of Muslim Brotherhood activists held a demonstration in front of the Israeli embassy in Amman, Jordan, demanding the cancellation of peace accords between the two countries and calling for the deportation of the Israeli ambassador.

Jordanian police deployed armored vehicles in the area, fearing a takeover attempt like the one at the Cairo, Egypt, embassy earlier this week.

On Wednesday, the Amman embassy was closed in the evening hours and diplomats were sent home, fearing violent clashes. "Jordan is not Egypt and the king and security forces are determined to keep the peace," said a source in the foreign ministry, "but it was decided not to take a chance."

Jordanians want Israel peace treaty scrapped

The Daily Star
9/15/2011


AMMAN/CAIRO: About 300 Jordanians demonstrated near the Israeli embassy in Amman Thursday, demanding that the government expel the Jewish state’s envoy and scrap the joint 1994 peace treaty.

The protest occurred as Egypt’s Prime Minister Essam Sharaf said that Egypt’s 1979 peace deal with Israel was not “sacred” and could be changed in order to benefit peace or the region.

In Amman the protesters gathered outside Al-Kaluti Mosque near the Israeli embassy, a security source said.

“The people want to shut down the embassy. Amman must be liberated from the embassy and ambassador,” the protesters chanted.

“The people want the downfall of Wadi Araba [peace] treaty,” read a banner carried by the demonstrators, including opposition Islamists, leftists and youth groups.

Some set the Israeli flag ablaze while others tried to get closer to the embassy but were prevented from doing so by police.

Nearly all the staff, including Ambassador Danny Navon, had been cleared out of the Israeli embassy ahead of the protest Thursday for fear the mission could be attacked like the Israeli embassy in Cairo was last week, Israeli newspapers and radio stations reported.

A convoy transporting the Israeli diplomats left Jordan for Israel overnight, the Haaretz newspaper said.

Egypt and Jordan are the only two Arab countries that have made peace with Israel.

Nearly half of Jordan’s 6 million residents are of Palestinian descent. With Palestinian-Israeli peace talks stalled, some Jordanians fear Israel may try to substitute Jordan for a Palestinian state.

The Palestinians plan to ask the United Nations next week to endorse an independent Palestinian state, over Israeli and U.S. opposition.

Ties with Egypt have been strained by the ransacking of the Israeli embassy in Cairo Friday and the killing of six Egyptian soldiers last month. The deaths occurred as Israeli troops pursued militants who had crossed from Egypt into southern Israel and attacked vehicles near the border, killing eight Israelis.

Sharaf’s comments on the 1979 peace treaty were the strongest yet by the new government which took over after President Hosni Mubarak was overthrown in February.

“The Camp David treaty is always open to discussion or for modification if that is beneficial for the region and for a just peace,” state-run MENA news agency reported, quoting remarks by Sharaf.

Israel prevents Palestinians from free movement

By DIAA HADID,
Associated Press –
6 hours ago

BIDDU, West Bank (AP) — Ahmad Ayyash once had a construction job in Israel, earning good money. Now he is a goat herder struggling to eke out a living, barred from working in Israel and restricted from entering his olive grove next to this West Bank village.

Ayyash's story is familiar to Palestinians, who face a complicated system of travel restrictions that Israel mostly developed during the height of violence between them and Palestinians, hoping to prevent militants from reaching the Jewish state and West Bank settlements.

The lone Palestinian airport was destroyed in the fighting. The seaport in Gaza is blockaded by Israel's navy. In the West Bank, a system of military checkpoints constrains movement between a hodgepodge of autonomous zones. Movement between the two territories — the linchpins of a future Palestinian state — is virtually impossible.

These restrictions highlight why Palestinians are asking the United Nations this month to recognize their independence in the West Bank, Gaza and east Jerusalem — territories captured by Israel in the 1967 Mideast war. It would be a symbolic acknowledgment that Palestinians deserve a cohesive state and give them moral — if not legal — support in challenging restrictions in the West Bank, which are to ensure the safety of Israeli Jews who live there and not within Israel's de facto borders, in defiance of international opinion.

Still, it won't immediately change realities on the ground, where Israel remains in control.

"I'm choking here," said Ayyash, 40. "I'm stuck."

Just over a decade ago, Ayyash entered Israel each morning, earning $50 a day as a laborer — enough to support his wife and five daughters. After peace proposals were rejected in 2000, a violent Palestinian uprising against Israel's occupation flared, and his job quickly ended.

Reacting to waves of Palestinian suicide bombings, Israel banned most laborers from entry. Checkpoints and roadblocks were erected throughout the West Bank.

The territory's 2.6 million Palestinians have some self-rule under the Western-backed Palestinian Authority, but Israel retains overall control. Some 500,000 Jewish settlers live in the West Bank and adjacent east Jerusalem, the Palestinians' hoped-for capital.

Israel's military built a massive separation barrier that kept out attackers but has also gobbled chunks of the West Bank along its meandering route.

The barrier prevents many Palestinians, including Ayyash, from reaching their farmland. Despairing, two years ago he purchased a dozen goats to sell their milk and meat. He earns about $10 a day herding in his village of Biddu, next to the Jewish settlement of Givat Zeev, and only a mile and a half from the Green Line dividing the West Bank from Israel.

Restrictions have kept Israelis safe from attack, alongside security coordination with Palestinian officials. With a lull in violence, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu removed dozens of checkpoints in the past 2½ years, contributing to an economic revival in the West Bank.

"The whole problem is to find a reasonable balance between the demands of the security and allowing the Palestinian population in the West Bank as normal a life as possible and to allow the economy to thrive," said Israeli security analyst Ephraim Sneh, a retired general who once led the military administration overseeing civilian affairs in the West Bank.

But Palestinians say easing restrictions isn't enough. Officials argue while they can understand Israel defending its de-facto border, there are still some 500 obstacles — road blocks, checkpoints, dirt mounds — scattered through the West Bank to protect dozens of Jewish settlements. Those settlements — particularly those deep within the West Bank — hinder the possibility of creating a viable Palestinian state.

In a recent report, the U.N. said Palestinians in some 70 West Bank villages encountered Israeli roadblocks that forced them to use indirect routes that dramatically lengthened their travels and affected their access to employment, education and medical care. The roadblocks were to protect Jewish settlements, military bases and roads used by Israelis.

The Israeli military says it is alleviating restrictions and that thousands of landowners have permits to reach their farms. But Palestinian farmers said the army frequently refuses permission and doesn't allow them — and their helpers — the regular access they need to tend their land.

In parts of the West Bank, Palestinians cannot reach their lands near some settlements because they fear attacks by extremist Jews. In other areas, hard-line Jews fenced off Palestinian land. Israel's army must secure some areas for Palestinians to enter.

Roadblocks and checkpoints string through the biblical West Bank city of Hebron to protect several hundred Jewish settlers who live in fortified enclaves amid 180,000 Palestinians.

The effects are palpable. Palestinian mothers and fathers clutched the hands of their children hands on a recent morning as they walked through Israeli checkpoints to school.

"Come on, champion!" one father urged his sleepy son.

A soldier ordered one youth to stand against a wall, patting him down before he passed. Another soldier spoke in polite Arabic and joked with the youths — some just younger than he.

Access to the Jordan Valley, a fertile strip of land farther north, is largely restricted to registered residents. Even then, most of the area is closed as military zones, nature reserves and Jewish settlements, U.N. officials said.

Entering Israel requires special permission. About 30,000 Palestinians enter Israel for work every day, according to the military, while others receive permission for medical care or to visit relatives.

These restrictions include entrance to east Jerusalem. The area — home to key Jewish, Christian and Muslim sites — was annexed by Israel decades ago as part of its capital. Palestinians say the moves are to cement Israeli control.

In Gaza, 1.5 million Palestinians are mostly penned into the tiny territory.

Palestinians hope to link the West Bank and Gaza, located on either side of Israel, into a single state. But the two territories have little contact, especially since the militant group Hamas seized control of Gaza in 2007.

Since then, Israel and Egypt enforced a blockade to try keep the group in check. Few may leave through the Israeli-controlled border, and Egypt limits movement through its frontier. Hamas demands that Gaza residents obtain its permission before they leave and have denied it to students seeking to study in the U.S.

Miyada Ghanem, a blind Palestinian woman in the West Bank village of Beitin, has little faith that the U.N. vote will change her life.

Fed up with a lengthy bus ride to her university in nearby Ramallah — the result of an Israeli road closure to protect a settlement, Ghanem said she is leaving to pursue her studies in the U.S.

"It's a long wait for this bus," said Ghanem, 24. "I don't think that is going to change."

Copyright © 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

The Israelis stop movement of the Palestinians with check points and disrupted travel service just as white South Afrikaaners stopped movement of black South Africans by a system of passes, each system designed to keep the native population under control by lessening opportunities for successful employment (with rising expectations) or for political resistance organizing. The comparisons between apartheid S.A. and Israel are eye-opening. The 1989 movie, A Dry, White Season, gives a taste of this comparison but the reality is what will break the back of the Israeli/U.S. tag-team of fascism in Palestine.

West Bank residents split on Palestinian statehood bid

Shoppers walk along a busy street near al-Manara Square in Ramallah with a Palestinian police car parked nearby In Ramallah, which is under PA control, it is easy to envisage a Palestinian state

BBC News
15 September 2011
Last updated at 08:07 ET

West Bank residents split on Palestinian statehood bid
By Yolande Knell
BBC News, Jerusalem

Palestinians in the West Bank are generally in favour of their leaders' attempt to get recognition for an independent Palestine at the United Nations.

But where they live, and their particular daily experience of Israel's occupation of the territory, significantly affects their views on the initiative.

In al-Manara Square in central Ramallah, people are overwhelmingly positive.

This is part of the occupied West Bank known as "Area A", meaning it is under control of the Palestinian Authority (PA).

"I support the PA, they are trying to bring our freedom from the UN," says a middle-aged man, Ziad. "They are asking the international community to recognise our rights".

"I encourage everyone who's responsible to take a step towards it". "Why not? As a symbol I would be very glad about it," says Leila, a young mother heading to the supermarket.

In the city it is easy to imagine what a future Palestinian state might look like.

Palestinian police officers direct traffic on the newly cleaned streets and the shops and restaurants are packed.

It lends a sense of relative prosperity and security.

"There's still more to do be done in terms of services and infrastructure but the economy has grown and security has improved a lot in the past few years," says a Ramallah resident, Hussein.

As two decades of peace talks have failed to secure a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Palestinian officials insist the time is right to ask the UN to grant full membership to an independent state of Palestine.

They want recognition on pre-1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as their capital.

A survey by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research in the West Bank and Gaza found that 65% favour the UN statehood bid despite warnings from the United States not to pursue it.
Area C

However you do not have to drive far into the West Bank to find Palestinians with serious reservations.s you drive along the main roads, red-roofed Jewish settlements line the hilltops, close to Palestinian villages and Israeli flags fly over military bases.

"Everything here has a demolition order. We're close to Carmel [settlement] and the Israelis are in charge here," says Zayd Hathaleen from a small Bedouin community south of Hebron.

"There's no Palestinian Authority, just we have the ID".

The local village, Um al-Khayr is in Area C, which covers 60% of the West Bank.

Here, Israel is fully in control of security, planning and building.

Some 150,000 Palestinians live in this zone, which was designated after the 1993 Oslo Accords.

Mr Hathaleen says it is hard to imagine a Palestinian state here.

"We're under occupation until now and you speak about a state?" he says.

"The Israeli army is everywhere here and the settlers are everywhere - they're armed and they cause a lot of problems and you speak about a state?"

"It's just a speech in the Security Council and that's it," he goes on. "You can speak all you want but on the ground, in actions you can't change anything."
Fears of violence

In another Area C location, in Burin, south of Nablus, Rahma Najar opens the door to her empty barn.
"See how the lock is broken, this used to be full of goats," she says.

Mrs Najar has lost many of her animals following clashes with the settlers who live near her family house.

Tensions have been rising again in recent weeks as the Palestinians prepare to go to the UN.

"We're afraid there will be more attacks now," she says.

However her son, Muhammad, hopes the new initiative will give the Palestinians access to international courts that will force the settlers to leave.

Settlements are considered illegal under international law, although Israel disputes this.

"Going to the United Nations is a positive step if it achieves its goal of a Palestinian state free of outside control," says Muhammad.

"Then we could live under own government in peace and security."

Managing expectations

Public meetings have been organised by the PA and civil society figures to try to explain the details of the UN effort and boost public support.

Rallies are planned for the coming weeks.

Yet international law expert, Abdallah Abu Eid, says expectations must be managed or there will be disappointment.

"This is a big danger, a psychological one. We have to tell normal people what are the pros and cons of the issue. They are still confused," he says.

"We can have a big jump towards statehood but a lot of academics are apprehensive of the move - they think it will only be on paper, it will not bring any practical improvement to our legal status."

At this meeting, locals stand as the Palestinian national anthem blares out of the loudspeakers.

"With the longing in my blood for my land and my home have climbed the mountains and fought the wars," go the lyrics.

People here feel a strong sense of national identity and most deeply want their own state but past experiences have taught them to be cautious.

Giving 1 Percent of Jesus to Somalia

Never Give Up
Sami Awad
Executive Director, Holy Land Trust
Posted: 9/12/11 01:00 PM ET


A deep pain grabbed my heart when I saw the television news ticker: "30,000 children died in Somalia in the last three months." A major cause of my pain came from a personal feeling of guilt and shame when I realized how fortunate my family is.

This week, our third daughter, who was born prematurely, came home after spending her first month of life in the hospital. From the moment she was born she received the highest level of care available here in Bethlehem. A group of expert Palestinian doctors monitored her progress every hour using the latest technology. There were multiple staff members attending to her care with beeps, rings and dings coming from every machine around her crib. Insurance was not a problem and covered 90 percent of the costs related to her long stay in the hospital. I could not have asked or prayed for anything better. However, my joy is overshadowed with pain knowing that 30,000 Somali children perished. Sorrow grips me knowing that hundreds of thousands of children across the world do not survive their first month because of a $2 vaccine that was not provided for their mothers.

My shame comes not only from a basic humanitarian feeling of compassion and responsibility; it comes from a core understanding of my faith. I believe in a Creator that makes every child born in His image. For many, this Creator is not spoken of until we want to blame someone for things gone wrong or want to praise someone for things gone right. Or perhaps it is better said when things do or don't go "our way," even if others may get hurt.

My shame comes from seeing indifferent religious leaders, who claim to be inspired by the Creator to lead the masses. I include those from my own Christian faith who fail to live by the most basic teachings of their doctrine and, worse, justify their lack of involvement in helping the needy and oppressed by creating complex theological arguments and justifications to hide behind. Some leaders are more than ready and willing to waste days in fancy hotels and retreat centers debating each other, nitpicking religious texts, attacking the sinfulness of others, defending their religious dogma, and even finding theological points for "common ground" and bridges in the interfaith debate. But when it comes to their involvement in disasters around the world, like what we are seeing in Somalia, most will not do more than mention it in a sermon, a call to God demanding Him to do something or ask congregants for a one-time financial collection for an aid organization.

As a follower of Jesus, I grew up with the "What Would Jesus Do?" statement. My older daughter wears it on a wristband: WWJD? I believe that if Jesus was here today He would head to Somalia. He would leave the temples and houses of worship and travel -- alone, with no entourage or media. He would find a way to reach the needy: feed them, heal them or, in the simplest of gestures, give compassion and care to a mother who just lost her child. He would not be looking at their religious beliefs as a justification to help or not. Jesus would not try to convert them into anything as a prerequisite or a condition to receive His help.

Those who commit their lives to following Jesus are asked to follow in His steps. Many will argue that these are hard and challenging tasks. They indeed are hard because we choose for them to be hard; if Jesus was physically here today, He would not do anything we cannot do ourselves.

I know that many, including myself, are not ready to leave everything and head to Somalia. What is the answer? The first step is to recognize and admit that, if we are religious, what determines our relationship with God is not only our faith but also how we relate to others. We must confess our shortcomings as sin and beg every Somali mother and father for their forgiveness. I believe we must act on behalf of those who are in the most need. We have a choice. We can create excuses to not do what Jesus would do, but maybe we can give a full heart's commitment and intention to do as little as 1 percent. If 100 followers of Jesus gave 1 percent, we would then have 100 percent, and that can create miracles. We need to stop blaming God for everything that goes wrong. If we live out our faith and truly live by our word instead of arguing, fighting and killing each other in the name of religion, causing even greater devastation, then tragedies like this could be quickly resolved, perhaps even avoided.

With all the challenges we live through here in Palestine and Israel, one thing is for sure: the way things stand now, my daughter is expected to grow healthy and have a life that the majority of people around the world will only dream of. In honor of her birth and future, I lay my head in the dust at the feet of every Somali father and mother begging them to forgive me and promising that I will give my 1 percent of Jesus to ensure they will not have to cry for another lost child.

What will you do? What do you think will happen if you also gave your 1 percent of Jesus to Somalia?

Sami Awad is a Palestinian Christian active in the nonviolence movement. He is the executive director of Holy Land Trust in Bethlehem. His story is told in the film 'Little Town of Bethlehem.' For more information, visit HolyLandTrust.org and LittleTownOfBethlehem.org.


Sami's a good man. He's been here in Humboldt County to give talks about the Palestinian cause.

Palestinians ask Obama: Why not endorse our Arab Spring?

Maen Rashid Areikat, chief diplomat at the PLO's Washington office, speaks at a Monitor-sponsored breakfast for reporters in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday, Sept. 13.
-Michael Bonfigli/Christian Science Monitor

President Obama is sending two Middle East envoys back to the region Tuesday for a final stab at dissuading the Palestinians from seeking a UN vote on statehood.

By Howard LaFranchi, Christian Science Monitor Staff writer
September 13, 2011

WASHINGTON

The United States and Israel may insist that a Palestinian bid for statehood at the United Nations next week will be disastrous for Middle East peace prospects, but Palestinian officials are painting the move in much more positive hues.

n a region where the Arab Spring is in full bloom, they argue, the Palestinian leadership has to offer its people something – especially with the peace process President Obama re-launched a year ago all but dead.

“This [UN move] is aimed at preserving the two-state solution,” said Maen Rashid Areikat, the Palestinian ambassador to Washington. “We are trying to keep hope alive among the Palestinian people that this [two-state solution] is going to be feasible.”

Join and share and invite your friends to Stop U.S.Aid to Israeli Occupation

http://www.facebook.com/pages/STOP-USAid-to-Israel/222256727814644

The Palestinian popular commitees have sent out the following message, asking for help in ending the staggering amount of aid the United states sends to Israel; aid that is essential in maintaining the illegal military occupation of Palestine. In London we will heed their call and demonstrate outside the US embassy on September 17th. If you support justice for the Palestinian people please be there, the message is;

Dear Friends

The popular comittees-Palestine asks all those who support peace and justice in Palestine to organise demonstrations in September outside the US embassies of their countries calling for the end of US aid to Israel. Demonstrations are already planned in front of the White House on September 15th and in front of the United Nations building in New York on September 15th, but to be successful we need to globalise the resistance.

American tax dollars go toward supporting an illegal and humiliating occupation of Palestinian land; the construction of illegal settlements; the annexation of Palestinian farmland; the purchase of weapons and arms used in night raids and military strikes. Right now American money finds its way to this part of the world where children and innocent civilians are killed, injured, and made to suffer. It also empowers the Israeli government to further ignore international law and perpetuate its intransigence.

These demonstrations in September will tell the US government to stop supporting this occupation and stand up for justice and freedom in Palestine, lets spread them far and wide accross the planet

http://www.facebook.com/pages/September15/216475758396747

London

http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=255937827764240


Qalandia

invitation
Popular Committee -Palestine has the honor to invite you for participating in the march which will take place in Qalandia September 21th, 2011.
Popular Committee -Palestine
ÊÏÚæßã ÇááÌÇä ÇáÔÚÈíÉ - ÝáÓØíä ááãÔÇÑßÉ Ýí ÇáãÙÇåÑÉ ÇáÍÇÔÏÉ Úáì ÍÇÌÒ ÞáäÏíÇ æÐáß íæã ÇáÇÑÈÚÇÁ 21 ÓÈÊãíÑ ÇáÓÇÚÉ ÇáÍÇÏíÉ ÚÔÑÉ ÕÈÇÍÇ - æ Óíßæä ÇáÊÌãÚ ÇãÇã ãÍØÉ ÇáæÞæÏ -ÞáäÏíÇ .

An American-Palestinian Reflection on 9/11

An American-Palestinian Reflection on 9/11

By Prof. Mazin Qumsiyeh

Ten years after September 11, 2001, we still have the choice of continuing
the same policies that lead to war and conflict or to insist on human rights
and hold violators accountable.

September brings back memories of atrocities ranging from the massacres of
Palestinians in Jordan September 1970, to the CIA's involvement in the coup
that installed General Pinochet in Chile (9/11/73), to the massacre of Sabra
and Shatila on 15 September 1982, and to the attacks of 11 September 2001 on
the US (my second home). These tragedies are demonstrably intertwined
beyond the coincidences of date and they each claimed the lives of hundreds
of civilian victims. I was with my late father during the first two of
these four events and his pain at hearing and seeing the news of these
events on TV remains etched in my memory. In Mid September 1970 and after
some Palestinian groups acted in ways that threatened his Hashemite rule in
Jordan, King Hussain declared martial law and sent his tanks to the refugee
camps. Routing the PLO out of Jordan meant "collateral damage" (the term
Israel and the US use) of massacres of hundreds of Palestinians. Horrific
stories of atrocities are recorded. Two years later, a CIA-led coup d'état
against the democratically elected socialist government of Salvador Allende
succeeded to place a right-wing dictator by the name of Pinochet in power.
It was on September 11, 1973, that the government was toppled and Allende
was assassinated. The US-supported reign of terror that followed against
the Chilean people left thousands of murdered. Thousands were tortured and
thousands disappeared.

Ten years later, the US-supported Israeli army invaded Lebanon June 1982 to
route the PLO out of Lebanon. The invading army pounded cities and refugee
camps and killed thousands of Lebanese and Palestinian civilians. Under a
deal arranged by Israel's patrons in Washington, the PLO was forced out of
Lebanon on 1 Sept. 1982 in exchange for promises that refugees would not be
harmed. US promises were not kept and Israel was given US weapons and
diplomatic cover to commit further acts of violence. A ruthless General
known to Israelis as the bulldozer (because nothing stood in his way)
commanded Israel’s invading army. On 11 September 1982 he announced that
the refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila had 2000 "terrorists" and unleashed
mercenaries to do his ghastly deed. The 150 Phalangist killers who went
into the camps on September 15 not only received Israeli salaries and
weapons but a direct Green light (the camp was surrounded by Israeli
soldiers, and Israeli floodlights allowed continuation of the massacre
throughout the night). For 40 hours straight, women were machine-gunned,
children's throats were slit, and elderly men were hacked to death.
Estimates of the number of victims ranged from 750 (Israeli figure) to 2500
(Red Cross figure).

I was living near New York on 11 September 2001. The horror was felt first
because for many of us, friends and relatives were in New York City and we
were very worried for them and for the country as a whole. The attacks also
killed many Arabs and Muslims. Immediately, the Zionist strategy was
developed and implemented to blame Arabs and Muslims and use the attacks to
bolster Israeli colonial activities. Some 2000 Palestinian civilians were
killed by Israeli forces in the two years that followed the attack (and the
Palestinian groups killed over 500 Israelis in retaliation). Later, the
commission of inquiry into the events hid many facts; the most important of
which is what any crime investigator asks about-- the real motive of the
crime. US policy in support of apartheid Israel was (and to a large extent
continues to be) a taboo subject. But the official attempts to stifle
discussion and force the US public to be consumers rather than citizens
largely failed. (Bush's speech after the events told citizens to simply go
shopping and leave things to him and his government). People actually had a
gut feeling that there are things they are not being told and they looked
for sources of information.

Our activism before 2001 for Palestinian human rights meant that we were in
the spotlight (both in the negative and positive sense) after the attacks.
Just in the six months after the horrific attacks, I gave over 40 lectures
and interviewed and appeared in media over 50 times. More than any other
time in my life in the US, I experienced directly both the goodness of the
US public and the treachery and meanness of those who only cared for
Israel. In my upcoming book about my life in the US, I devote some pages to
describe these things. Both the kindness and curiosity of average US
citizens and the attacks carried on us by those in the political Zionist
camp. We were subjected to email spams, computer hacking, mail fraud, FBI
investigations that came from Zionist sources, physical and verbal attacks,
and to deluge of letters calling us names (from terrorists to anti-Semites)
sent to media, politicians, and even our academic colleagues. Not only did
we weather that but we got strengthened in our resolve and much of it
backfired on the aggressors and gained us even more sympathy among the
American public.

Here we are 10 years after 11 September 2001 and we still have choices.
Thanks to US/Israeli miscalculations and stupidity, Iran is stronger than
ever as a regional power. The dictatorial governments of the friends of
Israel are toppled by popular revolt (Egypt, Tunisia) or about to be toppled
(Yemen). Others in the so-called "moderate" camp have been weakened or had
to reassess their positions (Jordan, the Palestinian Authority in
Ramallah). And while the US policy tried to balance things by working to
remove dictators who are less friendly to it (Gaddafi in Libya and Assad in
Syria), the outcome is far from certain (and people there may still get to
decide).

But there are also other changes related to the stupidity of US/Israeli
policies after 11 September 2001. Israeli forces executed nine Turkish
citizens (one of them also US citizen) in a humanitarian ship in
international waters and Israel refused to apologize. Turkey now expelled
the Zionist ambassador and cut trade and military ties with Israel.
Egyptian activists managed to enter the Israeli Embassy in Cairo and the
staff had to flee with the ambassador on his way to Tel Aviv. The carrot
and stick approach with the Palestinian authority was used successfully in
the past to force compliance with US and Israeli demands. Now it seems to
have begun to fail. David Hale and Tony Blair failed to get their way as
spokespersons for Israeli policy to force a retreat in the issue of going to
the UN to recognize a Palestinian state in the 22% of historic Palestine
that was occupied in 1967. They are now trying to get a language that
abrogates Palestinian rights (especially the right of return).

Thus, at the 10th anniversary of the attacks on 9/11, questions abound about
how Israel and neocons took US policy in the past 10 years in directions
that strengthened adversaries, promoted war, wrecked the American economy,
and destroyed the sympathy and solidarity shown by people around the world
to the US. Ten years after September 11, 2001, we still have the choice of
continuing the same policies that lead to war and conflict or to insist on
human rights and hold violators accountable.

On this sad anniversary, the US government can no longer afford to remain a
vassal and occupied country whose congress stands obediently to applause a
war criminal like Netanyahu. People shake their heads as they see 81 US
Congressmen and Congresswomen take a propaganda trip to Israel during their
August recess instead of spending the time dealing with the economic
destruction in their own districts caused in part by the lobby that paid for
their trip. People wonder how a proud country like the US could allow
Israel to get away with attacking a US ship in international waters
killing 34 US servicemen. How could this government then appoint lobbyists
for Israel as US ambassadors to Israel (e.g. Martin Indyk) and US envoys to
the Middle East (e.g. Dennis Ross)? Is it any wonder that we now learn that
previous US Secretary of Defense Bill Gates had big differences on issues of
policy? Many US officials now speak out while still in office not just after
they leave office. It is urgent and critical.

On this sad anniversary, there are a lot of "what if" scenarios being
discussed and healthy reflections around the world. For example, what if
the US and Israel obeyed international law? What if we did not illegally
invade and occupy Iraq and Afghanistan? What if Israel was forced to comply
with UN resolutions on withdrawal from illegally occupied areas and forced
to allow the ethnically-cleansed Palestinians to return to their homes and
lands? In short what if we did not send the message that might makes right
but rather that rights make things right? Would that not have been the most
rational response to extremists whether they are wearing Turbans or wearing
Kippas or wearing crosses?
-------------------
On the anniversary of 9/11: Robert Fisk writes that "For 10 years, we've
lied to ourselves to avoid asking the one real question"
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-for-10-years-weve-lied-
to-ourselves-to-avoid-asking-the-one-real-question-2348438.html

Arundhati Roy on September 11
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3091094076615820821#

Israeli envoy leaves Cairo after embassy attack

Reuters | 05:04 PM,Sep 10,2011

By Amena Bakr and Mohamed Abdellah CAIRO (Reuters) - Israel flew its ambassador home from Cairo on Saturday after protesters stormed its embassy building, plunging Egypt's military rulers into their worst diplomatic crisis since they took over from Hosni Mubarak. Three people were killed and 1,049 wounded in clashes between protesters and police, the Health Ministry said. The United States, which has poured billions of dollars of military aid into Egypt since it made peace with Israel in 1979, urged Cairo to protect the embassy after protesters hurled embassy documents and the Israeli flag from windows. "Our dignity has been restored," said Mohi Alaa, 24, a protester who was speaking near the site of overnight clashes with police around the building that houses the Israeli embassy. Bits of concrete and bullet casings were strewn over the street. "We don't want the Americans' money," he said, reflecting a growing readiness among many Egyptians to express anger at Israel and the United States over Israeli treatment of the Palestinians, after decades of pragmatic official relations. Police had fired shots in the air and teargas to disperse the crowd. Protesters had lit tyres in the street and at least two vehicles were set alight near the embassy, located on the upper floors of a residential block overlooking the Nile. One of the three who died was in the nearby Agouza hospital, where a Reuters reporter saw a corpse with a punctured chest. Some 500 protesters stayed after dawn and a few threw stones at police, who gradually pushed them away and secured the area. It was the second big eruption of violence at the embassy since five Egyptian border guards were killed last month when Israel repelled cross-border raiders it said were Palestinians. Egypt then briefly threatened to withdraw its envoy to Israel. Israel has stopped short of apologising, saying it is still investigating the Egyptian deaths, which occurred during an operation against gunmen who had killed eight Israelis.

AMBASSADOR EVACUATED Israeli ambassador Yitzhak Levanon, staff and family members arrived home on Saturday, but one diplomat stayed in Egypt to maintain the embassy, an Israeli official said. State television said Prime Minister Essam Sharaf headed an emergency ministerial crisis meeting and then went to see Field Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi, who heads the military council that has ruled Egypt since Mubarak resigned on Feb. 11. Israel is finding itself increasingly at odds with formerly sympathetic states in the region. It is already embroiled in a feud with Turkey, once the closest of its few Muslim allies, over its treatment of the Palestinians. Egypt's generals, under pressure to hand power to civilians more swiftly, must balance public calls for a more assertive foreign policy towards Israel with maintaining ties that bring cash and top-notch U.S. military equipment. Under Mubarak, Egyptians could never show such hostility to Israel without a crushing security response. Egypt's ties with Israel, though never warm, were a pillar of Mubarak's foreign policy and buttressed his claim to be a regional mediator. Mubarak regularly met Israeli officials. U.S. President Barack Obama called on Egypt to "honour its international obligations" and protect the Israeli mission. He told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that Washington was taking steps to resolve the situation. An Israeli official said the ambassador, staff and family members had left in one plane and a second one had brought home six Israeli security personnel who had been left guarding the embassy, protected from the crowd only by a reinforced door until Egyptian troops extracted them. "The fact that Egyptian authorities ultimately acted with determination is laudable. With that said, Egypt cannot let slide this harsh blow to the fabric of relations with Israel and the gross violation of international norms," Netanyahu said in a statement. He also thanked Washington for its role.

"SERIOUS STANCE" Before attacking the embassy, protesters had tried to storm a local police compound, hurled stones at the police and set at least four vehicles and a public building ablaze. The April 6 movement, which helped to lead the anti-Mubarak uprising, said those behind the violence were trying to "distort the image of the revolution". It blamed supporters of Mubarak. Some politicians and activists criticised the violence, even if they backed the anti-Israel demonstration. Presidential candidate Hamdeen Sabahy called for the army to take a "serious stance matching the public anger" towards Israel, but said violence sullied the image of Egypt's uprising. Last month, a man scaled the embassy building, took down Israel's flag and replaced it with Egypt's. Protests continued daily but did not turn violent until the latest flare-up. In response to the protests, the authorities had erected a wall around the building, which was quickly defaced with anti-Israel slogans and then painted in Egypt's national colours. On Friday, the wall was torn down after a demonstration in Cairo's Tahrir Square calling for speedier reforms and a deeper purge of officials who worked for Mubarak, the former president on trial on charges including conspiring to kill protesters.

(Reporting by Mohamed Abdellah, Seham Eloraby and Sami Aboudi in Cairo, Dan Williams in Jerusalem, and Christopher Wilson and Timothy Gardner in Washington; Writing by Edmund Blair; Editing by Alistair Lyon)