Reports, Reports, Reports

(1) DSCA Releases FY2010 Sales Figures

US military sales overseen by the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) topped $30 billion for the third consecutive year. Total sales for fiscal year 2010 were $31.6 billion. Sales under the government-to-government sales program called Foreign Military Sales (FMS) were $25.2 billion. Non-FMS security cooperation cases managed by DSCA under various security cooperation authorities were $6.4 billion.

The DoD program for support of Afghanistan’s security forces using the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund (ASFF) made up the majority of non-FMS security cooperation cases in fiscal year 2010 and totaled some $4.7 billion. This reflected continued support to the Government of Afghanistan in its fight against the Taliban and other insurgent forces. This ASFF-funded support was for training and equipping of the
Afghanistan National Security Forces. Non-FMS security cooperation cases also provided support to other foreign governments, including Iraq and Pakistan.

The Government of Israel at $4.0 billion led the FMS customer list with the highest value in sales followed by the Government of Egypt at $2.6 billion. Israel and Egypt are also the largest recipients of Foreign Military Financing (FMF) funds appropriated by Congress through the State Department to be used to pay for purchases of U.S. defense articles and services. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia at $2.5 billion and the Government of the United Kingdom at $1.8 billion rounded out the top four FMS customers in terms of the value of sales.

(2) 2009 Human Rights Report: Israel and the occupied territories

The 1967 Protection of Holy Sites Law protects all holy sites, but the government implemented regulations only for 137 Jewish sites, leaving Muslim and Christian sites neglected, inaccessible, or threatened by property development. The Church of the Holy Sepulchre and other well-known sites have de facto protection as a result of their international importance; however, community mosques, churches, and shrines faced threats from developers and municipalities that Jewish sites did not face. Christian pilgrimage sites around the Sea of Galilee faced regular threats of encroachment from government planners who wanted to use parts of the properties for recreational areas. The law provides for a hearing of objections to any plan or construction, including submissions by representative bodies such as the NGO Arab Center for Alternative Planning.

On March 16, the Supreme Court rejected Adalah’s 2004 petition requesting that the government promulgate regulations for the protection of Islamic holy sites. The government maintained that the promulgation of specific regulations, including determining how to expand the list of holy sites, was not necessary to preserve and protect the holy sites of any religion since the law provided for the protection of all holy sites of all religions.

(3) The 2010 Israeli Democracy Index: Democratic Values in Practice

Some of the findings:

  • Israel’s high incarceration rate, combined with inadequacies in the rule of law, cause it to fall short of the accepted standard in Western countries.
  • 60% of the population in Israel thinks that a few strong leaders would be better for Israel than all the democratic debates and legislation. 59% of that same group would prefer a government of experts who make decisions based on professional rather than political considerations.
  • 86% of the Jewish public (76% of the total population) thinks that critical decisions for the state should be made by the Jewish majority.
  • 53% of the Jewish public also believe that the State is entitled to encourage the emigration of Arabs.
  • 70% of Israel’s population thinks that there is no justification whatsoever for using violence in order to achieve political goals.
  • 81% of the population agrees with the assertion that “democracy is not a perfect regime, but it is better than any other form of government.” However, 55% of the public believes that Israel should put observing the law and public order before the ideals of democracy. Of the Jewish respondents, 60% of those on the political right supported this idea compared with 50% of those in the center and 49% of those on the left.
  • 54%, slightly more than half the general population in Israel today, state that they have full or partial confidence in the Supreme Court, compared with 44% who claim that they have no confidence in it at all.
  • Only 41% of respondents said that they have full or partial confidence in the police force.
  • 72% of the population say that they do not trust the political parties, although a 63% majority oppose the view that parties are no longer needed and should therefore be abolished.
  • Compared with 45% of Arab respondents, 69% of the Jewish population claims that the constitution is important to them.
  • 43% of the general population feels that it is equally important for Israel to be a Jewish and democratic country, while 31% regards the Jewish component as being more important, and only 20% defines the democratic element as being more important.
  • 41% of the population believes that freedom of religion and speech are implemented adequately; however, 39% believe that human rights are not sufficiently implemented.
  • 72% of the general public thinks that Israel’s democracy is adversely affected by the increase in socio-economic gaps.
  • 54% of the Jewish public opposes the view that legislation should be passed penalizing anyone who speaks out against Zionism.
  • 50% of the Jewish respondents agree that it is important to allow non-Zionist political parties to participate in elections.
  • 56% of veteran Israelis agree that people who have refused to serve in the IDF should not be allowed to vote or stand in elections. 62% of immigrants from the FSU disagree with this, while 76% of the ultra-Orthodox public rejects the idea.
  • 51% of the general public approves of equality of rights between Jews and Arabs. The more Orthodox the group, the greater the opposition to equal rights between Jews and Arabs: only 33.5% of secular Jews oppose this, compared with 51% of traditional Jews, 65% of Orthodox Jews and 72% of ultra-Orthodox Jews.
  • 67% of the Jewish public believe that close relatives of Arabs should not be permitted to enter Israel under of the rubric of family unification.
  • Almost two-thirds (62%) of Jews believe that as long as Israel is in conflict with the Palestinians, the views of Arab citizens of Israel on foreign policy and security matters should not be taken into consideration.
  • 51.5% of the Jewish sample agrees that only immigrants who are Jewish as defined by Halakha should be entitled to receive Israeli citizenship automatically, while only 34.5% of immigrants from the FSU agree with it. By segmentation, 41% of secular Jews and 88% of ultra-Orthodox agree, while traditional Jews and Orthodox Jews fall in the middle, with 63% and 79% respectively.
  • 55% of the general public thinks that more resources should be allocated to Jewish municipalities than to Arab municipalities, while a 42% minority disagrees with this statement.
  • Within the Jewish public, 71% of right-wing supporters agree that more resources should be allocated to Jewish municipalities than to Arab municipalities, as compared to 46% of centrists and 38% of leftists. When segmented by degree of religious observance, 51% of ultra-Orthodox Jews agree with the statement, while 45% of Orthodox Jews, 28% of traditional Jews, and 18% of secular Jews agree with it.
  • 39% of the general population supports equal funding of religious services while 35% oppose it. Taking only the Jewish population into account, 41% support equal funding of religious services, while 33% oppose it.
  • 54% of the general population supports equal funding of schools, while 26% oppose it.
  • 46% of the Jewish public admitted to being most bothered by the possibility of having Arabs as neighbors. This was followed equally by people with mental illness being treated in the community and foreign workers (39% each). 25% would be bothered by same-sex couples, 23% by ultra-Orthodox Jews, 17% by Ethiopian immigrants, 10% by non-Sabbath observers, and 8% by immigrants from the Former Soviet Union.
  • The Arab public is less tolerant than Jews of neighbors who are “Other.” 70% thought the least desirable neighbors would be same-sex couples and 67% were opposed to having ultra-Orthodox Jews as neighbors, followed closely by 65% who would be opposed to former settlers. 48% answered that the most “tolerable” neighbors would be foreign workers.

Australian Zionist Organisation Funding Appropriation of West Bank Sites

The initial piece in the Jerusalem Post alerted the world to some scurrilous shenanigans perpetrated by the United Israel Appeal’s New South Wales branch:

‘A major Zionist organization has withdrawn an advertisement because it featured images mocking the torture of prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. The United Israel Appeal (New South Wales) – Keren Hayesod last week withdrew the ad for a young adult UIA event, which was issued as a press release as well as on a Facebook page.’

Looking for a story behind the news, we investigated where the funds of the United Israel Appeal are disbursed.

In October, the Israel-based parent body of the United Israel Appeal, Keren Hayesod, sealed a deal with the Israeli government.

‘Leading the projects that Keren Hayesod will support is Prime Minister’s Office project regarding national heritage sites. Keren Hayesod has taken it upon itself to raise funds in order to supplement the Government budget and expand the scope of the project.’.

As is customary with its illegal apartheid wall, the majority of which is sited on the Palestinian land across the 1967 Green Line, Israel stretches the boundaries of what it regards as ‘national’.

On February 21, 2010, Netanyahu presented a Cabinet Communique outlining earmark funding of the national heritage project.

I would like to add three short comments.

– The list of sites submitted here is neither closed nor final. It can and will certainly include other sites. I also intend to include Rachel’s Tomb, to the rehabilitation of which the Jewish Agency has allocated NIS 20 million, and the Tomb of the Patriarchs. Since I was asked, I would like to make my intentions clear, and this is what will be.

– The donations that we are talking about here are earmarks. The list submitted here is the Government’s earmarked budget, even though we hope to receive the assistance of many other elements.

– We will meet again this week in order to approve the national transportation plan that will join the Galilee and the other parts of the State of Israel in an accessible national transportation grid, and which will – inter alia – bring people to this wonderful place. I think that it will greatly contribute to bringing the periphery closer to the center and vice-versa, itself a great economic contribution.”

What is Keren Hayesod’s relationship with the Jewish Agency?

Keren Hayesod is headed by a board of trustees, appointed by the Zionist Executive and the Jewish Agency. In addition to financing the activities of the Jewish Agency, Keren Hayesod undertook to support the yishuv economically and to provide financial assistance for development and settlement. Most revenues come from fundraising and are distributed by the institutions of the Zionist movement. Keren Hayesod collects donations in almost all countries with a Jewish community, either directly or through volunteers.

UNESCO has recently insisted that Israel remove the Cave of the Patriachs and Rachel’s Tomb, both located in the Palestinian West Bank, from its list of national heritage sites as they are sites of mosques. Abbas and Haniyeh have also insisted the sites be removed from Netanyahu’s proposed national heritage trail. Netanyahu has refused to do so.

Through its funding arrangements with its Israeli parent body, the United Israel Appeal New South Wales branch is complicit with Israeli commandeering of ‘national’ heritage sites in the West Bank.

‘In NSW, 50% of Women’s Division funds are allocated to The Nurit Absorption Centre , located in Be’er Sheva. The remaining 50% of funds raised are incorporated into the universal revenue of Keren Hayesod in Israel.’

Under its never-fully implemented Declaration of Establishment of 1948, Israel undertook to safeguard the holy sites of all religions. Israel has failed to fulfill its promise. As the 2008 US State Department Human Rights Report: Israel and the occupied territories states:

The 1967 Protection of Holy Sites Law protects all holy sites, but the government implemented regulations only for 137 Jewish sites, leaving many Muslim and Christian sites neglected, inaccessible, or threatened by property development. The Holy Sepulchre and other well-known sites have de facto protection as a result of their international importance; however, community mosques, churches, and shrines often faced threats from developers and municipalities that Jewish sites did not face. Christian pilgrimage sites around the Sea of Galilee faced regular threats of encroachment from district planners who wanted to use parts of the properties for recreation.

The just-released 2009 US State Department International Report on Religious Freedom reiterates the problems noted in the previous year’s report:

The 1967 Protection of Holy Sites Law applies to holy sites of all religious groups within the country and in all of Jerusalem, but the Government implements regulations only for Jewish sites. Non-Jewish holy sites do not enjoy legal protection under it because the Government does not recognize them as official holy sites. At the end of 2008, there were 137 designated holy sites, all of which were Jewish. Furthermore, the Government has drafted regulations to identify, protect, and fund only Jewish holy sites. While well-known sites have de facto protection as a result of their international importance, many Muslim and Christian sites are neglected, inaccessible, or threatened by property developers and municipalities. The Christian pilgrimage sites around the Sea of Galilee face periodic threats of encroachment from district planners who want to use parts of their properties for recreation. In the past, only diplomatic interventions have forestalled such efforts. Such sites do, however, enjoy certain protections under the general Penal Law (criminal code), which makes it a criminal offense to damage any holy site. Following a 2007 order by the High Court to explain its unequal implementation of the 1967 Protection of Holy Sites Law, the Government responded in March 2008 that specific regulations were not necessary for the protection of any holy sites. The Government did not explain why it therefore promulgated regulations for Jewish sites but not for non-Jewish sites.

Donations to the United Israel Appeal are tax deductible so untaxed Australian income can be diverted overseas to fund Israeli ‘national heritage’ projects in the illegally occupied West Bank. Frank Lowy is a Life Governor of the UIA while son Steven Lowy is Chairman, Major Donor Division.

Frank Lowy’s money ended up in Israeli charities from his untaxed Liechenstein bank accounts.

And this is from the Murdoch press back home:

Just prior to being appointed to the RBA board in 1995, Frank Lowy paid $25million to settle a long-running tax dispute with the Australian Taxation Office.

That dispute related to a $48.3 million payment received by a Lowy family company, Cordera Holdings. Three days after a court hearing began, a settlement was reached. In mid-February this year, German tax authorities conducted raids on dozens of prominent businessman for allegedly using Liechtenstein bank accounts, and two weeks later the ATO announced there were 20 audit cases under way relating to funds in Liechtenstein ranging from $200,000 to millions of dollars.

Why hasn’t the ATO done anything about this yet? Any reporters asking questions over here? Or is Lowy too powerful on his home pitch?

The Murdoch media repeatedly stresses that:

There is no suggestion the Lowys are the subject of the Australian or US investigations.

No, they are just being called to give evidence at a Senate inquiry about dodgy tax schemes, where they have previous form. I am sure they are just popping in for a little chat, that’s all. Lowy was also linked to a corruption scandal involving Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, but I’m sure that Mr Olmert is just a very nice man too.

But according to Lowy, those Israeli charities got ALL the money:

“The report fails to mention the fact that all of the funds held in the structure in the Liechtenstein bank were distributed for charitable purposes in Israel some years ago,” he said.

Lowy is a long-term donator to Keren Hayesod.

Brog, who described Lowy’s politics in Israel as “centre-left”, said he believed he had also been a strong supporter of, and donor to, the Labour Party. He had also been a “very, very generous donor to Keren Hayesod” since the 1980s, Brog said.

“And I would expect that that financial support has only increased in the years since.”

According to a handful of Australian and Israeli businessmen who are active in Israel and keep an eye on Lowy’s movements in that country, the money that he puts into the Institute for National Security Studies and Keren Hayesod are the two main concerns he devotes time to outside his business interests.

UPDATES

Translation: Visiting Hebron is a must, but do make sure you see everything

When visiting the Cave of the Patriarchs one must not only explore the well-tended and re-paved Jewish part of the cave. One must also enter the Muslim side, though access is not as convenient. You can also visit the deserted Shuhada Street with the ubiquitous IDF positions everywhere. Tamar Golan and Michal Tsadik from Machsom Watch

Israeli education: Molding fascists, one student at a time
The Tax-Exempt Status of Charities that Support Israeli Settlements

UPDATE 6/2/12

The theft by heritage stealth continues:

Asked about the politicization of national heritage sites, he answers very seriously: “The fact that we are located within the Prime Minister’s Office gives us a status and presence that we wouldn’t have if we were part of a ministry. It is impossible to ignore us. Everyone sees us as the right people to approach.”

He says the prime minister and cabinet secretary are involved and interested in the national heritage project, but do not dictate what is to be done. Furthermore, recent cuts at government ministries did not affect his project.

“The decision to place heritage sites on the agenda is a legitimate political decision, but that is where the politics stops. Beyond that, everything stems from professional considerations. There is a lot of pressure on us, but it comes from local council heads. Many of them think I have piles of money to distribute.”

The list of 220 proposed sites includes 30 in the West Bank. Five have either been approved or have a good chance of getting the green light for financial support and development from Pinsker and his colleagues. But the issue of whether a potential site is located inside or outside the Green Line does not seem relevant to Pinsky. “The question from my perspective is: How many visitors could we bring to the site after we decide to invest in it? It doesn’t matter to me if it’s in Judea and Samaria or Tel Aviv.”

Pinsky says he is, however, aware of the criticism the project may encounter. “If someone suggests building an elevator in the Cave of the Patriarchs, because it is an important site, I would consider this based on its merits,” he explains. “But because the site is a sensitive place, I would first submit a recommendation to the prime minister. I would not promote it on my own.”

Pinsky gently criticizes the council heads in West Bank areas who, he says, “thought that the fact that a kippah-wearer was appointed to the job guarantees that their issues would be taken care of. Very quickly they realized things don’t work that way and that we arrive at our decisions in a very focused way.”

Related Links

How much do we know about Frank Lowy and his beloved Israel?
Lowy’s Israeli Charities?
The secret Auschwitz ceremony that Ehud Olmert exposed
Introducing the Jewish National Fund Vol1 [pdf]
Preparing for Legal Action: Focus on Canada Park Vol2 [pdf]
Ongoing Ethnic Cleansing: Judaising the Naqab [pdf]
Greenwashing Apartheid Vol4 [pdf]

At last year’s UIA gala fundraiser in Sydney, president Bruce Fink said it had raised $16 million, making it the “highest per capita campaign in the Keren Hayesod world.”

Shopping mall magnate Frank Lowy, a life governor of the UIA who fought in the 1948 War of Independence, reminded the 1,000-plus donors in the audience of the countless lives lost defending Israel. “We must recognize our responsibilities and pay our dues,” Lowy said.

Burla believes discontent is mounting among the younger generation of Australian Jews, despite the country being “arguably the most Zionist Jewish community in the Diaspora.”

“In particular, the lack of trust reflects a growing sense among the younger generation of the Australian Diaspora that Israel sees Australian Jewry as a resource that can be used for its own needs, without any accountability or mutual responsibility,” Burla wrote at the time of the scandal surrounding the death of Australian-born Ben Zygier, an alleged Mossad agent who committed suicide inside an Israeli maximum-security prison in 2010.

Life and Debt – the chains of globalisation and neoliberal imperialism

This film is a powerful exposes of the way vulnerable countries are ruthlessly farmed by empire and its mercantilist consorts, assisted by the World Bank and IMF, to the detriment of local people and environment.

Don’t just sit stunned after watching, get out there and challenge the corporations and countries who enslave people for venal gain. Spread the word, make this film viral!