Dancing On The Front Porch of Heaven Rehearsal Ulysses Dove’s commentary on his choreography with The Swedish Royal Ballet and snippets of the rehearsals.

//

1 year ago 2,345 views

DuncanzibarNo2 Dancing On The Front Porch of Heaven Rehearsal

Entertainment

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dopt9jQNjs4

Zero Palestinian Evictions, now!

The Israeli Ministry of the Interior demolishes hundreds of homes of its own Palestinian citizens every year due to zoning and planning schemes intentionally insufficient for the needs of the communities. There are, in addition, dozens of villages not recognized by the government whose residents live in the constant instability that comes with pending … Continue reading

 

On Anti-Semitism, Boycotts,

and the Case of Hermann Dierkes:

An Open Letter from Jewish Peace Activists

We are peace activists of Jewish background. Some of us typically identify in this way; others of us do not. But we all object to those who claim to speak for all Jews or who use charges of anti-Semitism to attempt to squelch legitimate dissent.

We have learned with dismay the allegations regarding Hermann Dierkes, a trade unionist and leader of the Left Party (DIE LINKE) in the German city of Duisburg. Dierkes, in response to the recent Israeli assault on Gaza expressed the view that one way people could help Palestinians obtain justice would be to support the call of the World Social Forum to boycott Israeli goods, so as to put pressure on the Israeli government.

Dierkes has been subjected to widespread and vitriolic denunciations for anti-Semitism, and accused of calling for a repeat of the Nazi policy of the 1930s of boycotting Jewish products. Dierkes responded that “The demands of the World Social Forum have nothing in common with Nazi-type racist campaigns against Jews, but aim at changing the Israeli government’s policy of oppression of the Palestinians. “

No one has made any claims of anti-Semitism against Dierkes for anything other than his support of the boycott. Yet he has been accused of “pure anti-Semitism” (Dieter Graumann the Vice-President of the Central Jewish Council), of uttering words comparable to “a mass execution at the edge of a Ukrainian forest” (Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung editorialist Achim Beer), and of expressing “Nazi propaganda” (Hendrik Wuest, General Secretary of the Christian Democratic Party).

We signatories have differing views on the wisdom and efficacy of calling for a boycott of Israeli goods. Some of us believe that such a boycott is an essential component of a  campaign of boycott, divestment, and sanctions that can end the four-decade- long Israeli occupation; others think the better way to pressure the Israeli government is with a more selective boycott focused on institutions and corporations supporting the occupation. But all of us agree that it is essential to apply pressure against the Israeli government if peace and justice are to prevail in the Middle East and all of us agree that a call for a boycott of Israel has nothing in common with the Nazi policy of “Don’t buy from Jews.” It is no more anti-Semitic to boycott Israel to end the occupation than it was anti-white to boycott South Africa to end apartheid. Social justice movements have often called for boycotts or divestment, whether against the military regime in Burma or the government of Sudan. Wise or not, such calls are in no way discriminatory.

Violence in the Middle East has indeed led to some acts of anti-Semitism in Europe. There was a call to boycott Jewish-owned stores in Rome that was widely and appropriately condemned. We deplore such bigotry. Israel‘s crimes cannot be attributed to Jews as a whole. But, at the same time, a boycott of Israel cannot be equated with a boycott of Jews as a whole.

An acute and disturbing form of racism rising in Europe today is Islamophobia and xenophobia directed at immigrants from Muslim countries. Dierkes has been a champion in defense of the rights of immigrants, while some of those who accuse all critics of Israel of being anti-Semitic often participate themselves — like the Israeli government and state — in such forms of racism.

The Holocaust was one of the most horrific events in modern history. It is a dishonor to its victims to use its memory as a bludgeon to silence principled critics of Israel‘s unconscionable treatment of Palestinians.

From: Z Net – The Spirit Of Resistance Lives

URL: http://www.zmag. org/znet/ viewArticle/ 21016

April 4, 2009
Op-Ed Contributor
Israel on Trial
By GEORGE BISHARAT

San Francisco 

CHILLING testimony by Israeli soldiers substantiates charges that
Israel’s Gaza Strip assault entailed grave violations of international
law. The emergence of a predominantly right-wing, nationalist
government in Israel suggests that there may be more violations to
come. Hamas’s indiscriminate rocket attacks on Israeli civilians also
constituted war crimes, but do not excuse Israel’s transgressions.
While Israel disputes some of the soldiers’ accounts, the evidence
suggests that Israel committed the following six offenses: 

Violating its duty to protect the civilian population of the Gaza
Strip. Despite Israel’s 2005 “disengagement” from Gaza, the territory
remains occupied. Israel unleashed military firepower against a people
it is legally bound to protect. 

Imposing collective punishment in the form of a blockade, in violation
of Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. In June 2007, after
Hamas took power in the Gaza Strip, Israel imposed suffocating
restrictions on trade and movement. The blockade — an act of war in
customary international law — has helped plunge families into poverty,
children into malnutrition, and patients denied access to medical
treatment into their graves. People in Gaza thus faced Israel’s winter
onslaught in particularly weakened conditions. 

Deliberately attacking civilian targets. The laws of war permit
attacking a civilian object only when it is making an effective
contribution to military action and a definite military advantage is
gained by its destruction. Yet an Israeli general, Dan Harel, said, “We
are hitting not only terrorists and launchers, but also the whole Hamas
government and all its wings.” An Israeli military spokeswoman, Maj.
Avital Leibovich, avowed that “anything affiliated with Hamas is a
legitimate target.” 

Israeli fire destroyed or damaged mosques, hospitals, factories,
schools, a key sewage plant, institutions like the parliament, the main
ministries, the central prison and police stations, and thousands of
houses. 

• 

Willfully killing civilians without military justification. When
civilian institutions are struck, civilians — persons who are not
members of the armed forces of a warring party, and are not taking
direct part in hostilities — are killed. 

International law authorizes killings of civilians if the objective of
the attack is military, and the means are proportional to the advantage
gained. Yet proportionality is irrelevant if the targets of attack were
not military to begin with. Gaza government employees — traffic
policemen, court clerks, secretaries and others — are not combatants
merely because Israel considers Hamas, the governing party, a terrorist
organization. Many countries do not regard violence against foreign
military occupation as terrorism. 

Of 1,434 Palestinians killed in the Gaza invasion, 960 were civilians,
including 121 women and 288 children, according to a United Nations
special rapporteur, Richard Falk. Israeli military lawyers instructed
army commanders that Palestinians who remained in a targeted building
after having been warned to leave were “voluntary human shields,” and
thus combatants. Israeli gunners “knocked on roofs” — that is, fired
first at corners of buildings, before hitting more vulnerable points —
to “warn” Palestinian residents to flee. 

With nearly all exits from the densely populated Gaza Strip blocked by
Israel, and chaos reigning within it, this was a particularly cruel
flaunting of international law. Willful killings of civilians that are
not required by military necessity are grave breaches of the Geneva
Conventions, and are considered war crimes under the Nuremberg
principles. 

Deliberately employing disproportionate force. Last year, Gen. Gadi
Eisenkot, head of Israel’s northern command, speaking on possible
future conflicts with neighbors, stated, “We will wield
disproportionate power against every village from which shots are fired
on Israel, and cause immense damage and destruction.” Such a frank
admission of illegal intent can constitute evidence in a criminal
prosecution. 

Illegal use of weapons, including white phosphorus. Israel was finally
forced to admit, after initial denials, that it employed white
phosphorous in the Gaza Strip, though Israel defended its use as legal.
White phosphorous may be legally used as an obscurant, not as a weapon,
as it burns deeply and is extremely difficult to extinguish. 

Israeli political and military personnel who planned, ordered or
executed these possible offenses should face criminal prosecution. The
appointment of Richard Goldstone, the former war crimes prosecutor from
South Africa, to head a fact-finding team into possible war crimes by
both parties to the Gaza conflict is an important step in the right
direction. The stature of international law is diminished when a nation
violates it with impunity. 

George Bisharat is a professor at the University of California Hastings
College of the Law.

Bystander Ian Tomlinson was hit by a policeman and died during G20 protests last week. The right to peaceful protest is a vital part of our democracy — tell the Home Secretary and the Metropolitan Police to fix the flaws in British protest policing now and prevent any more deaths like this:

Peaceful protests can change the world. Last week’s G20 summit wouldn’t have taken the decisions it did without the non-violent pressure hundreds of thousands of citizens brought to bear — like our peaceful march with thousands of green hard hats the weekend before the G20.[1]

The protests in the City of London immediately before the summit were rowdier than our own, but still overwhelmingly peaceful despite media hysteria, aggressive policing and a handful of troublemakers. Tragically, one man died that day — bystander and newspaper-seller Ian Tomlinson. Now video footage shows that he was struck down by a masked, baton-wielding policeman.[2]

We’ve worked with the police on our own public demonstrations, and they play an essential role in making peaceful protest possible. But not for the first time, the police lost their way at these City protests — using excessive force, starting to criminalise the peaceful majority and creating pressure-cooker confrontations instead of defusing them. Enough is enough — the British tradition of peaceful public protest is too important to lose. Follow this link to watch the video and sign the emergency petition to fix British policing of demonstrations — we’ll deliver it directly to the Home Secretary, Parliament and the Metropolitan Police:

http://www.avaaz.org/en/fix_british_protest_policing

The Independent Police Complaints Commission is now investigating Ian Tomlinson’s death minutes after he was struck down — but he was far from the only innocent person injured by violent police tactics on April 1st, as a growing flood of dependable eyewitnesses‘ testimonies and videos have begun to reveal.[3] This is not an isolated incident. It points to wider failings in the policing of demonstrations in the UK in recent years.

The policy of “kettling” (penning in people including bystanders, families and those who want to move on, often for ten hours or more) seems to create a pressure-cooker atmosphere of frustration and confrontation. Instead of isolating and removing the handful of troublemakers who wrecked the Royal Bank of Scotland branch, the police responded by cracking down on the peaceful majority, confining them, forcing them to give personal information, and charging them with batons and dogs. This cannot be right.

The separate and wholly-peaceful “climate camp” on Bishopsgate was subject to similar imprisonment and baton-charges. Initial police statements about these events have often turned out to be misleading. As well as constraining rights of assembly, new laws now supposedly prohibit taking the very photos and videos of police officers which have begun to reveal the truth of these events.

We can’t let this slide toward unaccountability continue. Many of those policing this demonstration wore balaclavas or took their identification numbers off. By telling the media before the protests that they were “up for it” if violence ensued, commanding officers were whipping up dangerous hysteria. As Andy Hayman, the former Assistant Commissioner of the Met wrote yesterday: “If left unchecked, we have a more violent crowd in uniform than the crowd demonstrating.”

This is ultimately a question of government policy and accountability — so we’ll deliver the petition to Home Secretary Jacqui Smith and the Home Affairs Committee of Parliament as well as the Metropolitan Police, and alert the media to raise wider awareness of this effort.

After Ian Tomlinson’s death, it’s time to fix the policing of demonstrations in Britain. Sign the emergency petition at the link below, and share this message with friends, family and colleagues:

http://www.avaaz.org/en/fix_british_protest_policing

With hope and determination,

Paul, Alice, Iain and the whole Avaaz team

Sources:

[1] Avaaz video from peaceful London G20 demonstration:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOkEdJGfrCw&eurl

[2] The Guardian — “New video footage from G20 protests gives fresh angle on attack”:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/video/2009/apr/08/g20-police-assault-ian-tomlinson-video

[3] Chris Abbott, Open Democracy — “Trapped and beaten by police in Climate Camp”:
http://www.opendemocracy.net/blog/ourkingdom-theme/ourkingdom/2009/04/09/trapped-and-beaten-by-police-in-climate-camp

——————————

ABOUT AVAAZ Avaaz.org is an independent, not-for-profit global campaigning organization that works to ensure that the views and values of the world’s people inform global decision-making. (Avaaz means “voice” in many languages.) Avaaz receives no money from governments or corporations, and is staffed by a global team based in Ottawa, London, Rio de Janeiro, New York, Buenos Aires, and Geneva. Call us at: +1 888 922 8229 or +55 21 2509 0368 Click here to learn more about our largest campaigns. Don’t forget to check out our Facebook and Myspace and Bebo pages!
You are getting this message because you signed “Stop the Climate-Wrecking at Bali” on 2007-12-14 using the email address mmemduh2@yahoo.co.uk. To ensure that Avaaz messages reach your inbox, please add avaaz@avaaz.org to your address book. To change your email address, language settings, or other personal information, https://secure.avaaz.org/act/index.php?r=profile&user=1be94178936c2ff5e771b340cd6e8441&lang=en, or simply go here to unsubscribe.

To contact Avaaz, please do not reply to this email. Instead, write to info@avaaz.org. You can also call us at +1-888-922-8229 (US) or +55 21 2509 0368 (Brazil) If you have technical problems, please go to http://www.avaaz.org

1. From: “George Galloway .com” <georgegallowaydotco m@gmail.com>