Nakba commemoration: protesters carry a 5 meter long key in Bil’in

Bil’in Popular Committee

15 May 2009

Residents of Bil’in marched today after the Friday prayer in a protest joined by international and Israelis activists. Protesters carried Palestinian flags and posters of the martyr, Bassem Abu Rahmah, and also banners commemorating 61 years of the Palestinian Nakba (catastrophe). A 5 meter long key was carried as a symbol to the right of return which a lot o Palestinians still have keys of their original homes and land ownership documents.

Protesters marched towards the wall calling for the end of the occupation, and to stop construction of the Wall. What the Palestinians are facing by the Israeli occupation did not stop with one Nakba, but the aggression is still continuous especially the most recent offense on Gaza. Settlement building, home demolishing, and the ethic cleansing of the Palestinians in Jerusalem are all Nakbas.

The Israeli army had gathered in big numbers behind cement blocks and used razor wire to prevent the crowd from going through the gate. The army fired tear gas canisters to disturb the crowd, causing dozens to suffer gas inhalation and nine were shot with rubber coated steel bullets. The injured : Auda Aburahma and his brother Ahmad, Jameel Alkhatib and his brother Kamel, Jaber Aburahma, Baseem Yassen, Iyad Burnat, Hamdi Aburahma, and Mohammed Aburahma.

Balata Camp commemorates the Nakba

14 May 2009

Balata residents mark Nakba day
Balata residents mark Nakba day

The Nakba Committee of Nablus organized a commemoration ceremony in Balata village. About 500 people from the area gathered to attend the event where various speeches were given by community officials such as the Mayor of Nablus and others.

Some 500 Palestinians with flags and banners gathered in Balata village at the outskirts of Nablus to observe the 61st memorial day of the Nakba, when hundreds of thousands of Palestinians where expelled from their homeland and became refugees.

The mayor of Nablus, Dr. Jamal Mhezen, held a speech about the Nakba and the political situation today. He pointed out that the Palestinian government did everything Israel was asking for, and rhetorically he asked, ”What did Israel do for the Palestinians?” He talked about the rights of return, and emphasized that Palestinians want peace, but that there are more than one ways to achieve it. He encouraged everyone to continue their struggle for peace in memory of the martyrs.

During the speech of the mayor, a fight broke out between two men. The Palestinian police force attempted to disperse the crowd. Several shocked protesters ran away or became panicked. The situation calmed down shortly thereafter and the ceremony was resumed.

On grounds leased from Balata village for 99 years, the UNWRA established Balata Refugee Camp in 1950 following the establishment of the State of Israel and the ensuing war with the Arab countries. According to Mahmoud Subuh, International Relation at the Yafa Cultural Center, some 800,000 Palestinians had become refugees by 1949. Balata Camp is the largest populated refugee camp in the West Bank. Yet it has the smallest surface area of a mere one square kilometer. It was established for 5,000-6,000 refugees, but today, 25,000 live there. Initially, tents were built as a temporary solution to ease the refugee problem until the conflict would be solved, and the UN Resolution 194 “The Rights of Return” implemented. However, the law of return remained in existance only on paper and was never implemented.

The tents of the first 5,000 refugees remained for about 10 years, however. Then, people were allowed to replace them with small houses, 3x3x2 meters, but only with the permission of the UN. Subsequently, residents were allowed to add more stories as the families grew. There are families of up to 80 people living in a single house. Everyone used communal bathrooms initially, but now they have bathrooms separated by gender.

Since 1970, refugees from Balata Camp were allowed to go into Israel to seek employment, which improved the economic situation somewhat. Yet, the cramped living condition in the Camp is extremely hard to deal with. People are fighting with each over minor things out of frustration. Kids are tough, and are seen as the “Mafia” by the village kids who are going to the same school. They do not have a bright future so the objective of the Yafa Cultural Center is to offer art classes, music, filmmaking and other activities to the youth and women.

Balata Camp is very active politically. During the second intifada, 230 refugees of Balata Camp were killed, and 480 are still in prison today. The root of the economic problems is due to the fact that the refugees at Balata Camp came there with nothing. Most of them came from the Yaffa area. Most people are workers. Before the 2nd intifada, about 60% of the Balata refugees worked in Israel. Now, there is a mere 3% due to restrictive laws for Palestinian workers in Israel, harassment at checkpoints, and the Occupation in general.

Children are suffering extremely under this oppression and economic hardship, not getting healthy nutrition and poor education. About 60% of the kids at Balata Camp are anemic. Some 6,000 kids go to three schools, which means that classes have up to 55 students. Psychological problems are very frequent, i.e. children are wetting their beds, are aggressive, etc. What makes the situation worse, is that recently, the UN cut back on services so that the schools have the worst teachers because they are not paid well and are offered only temporary contracts. In terms of health, there is severe shortage of medicine at local hospitals

According to Mahmoud Subuh, the exodus of Balata refugees such as moving to the village, buying their home and build their existence outside the Camp is not the solution. It would take away their status of refugees and with it, they would lose their rights of return. They would become citizens without a state.

Norwegian MP: If investment in occupation acceptable, we must revise ethics guidelines

Ma’an News Agency

15 May 2009

A Norwegian ethics committee is due to travel to Israel and the West Bank in two weeks to assess the investment of the world’s largest government pension fund, The Norwegian Government Pension Fund, in Africa Israel Investments.

In advance of that visit, a delegation of seven members of the Norwegian Socialist Left Party travelled to the West Bank and Gaza Strip this week to see for themselves the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, siege on Gaza and the destruction wrought following Israel’s war on the area last winter.

After under a week in the area Member of Parliament Ågot Valle, spokesperson on foreign affairs for the party, spoke out about Norwegian investment in the Africa Israel Investments company. “No doubt we as a party cannot support investment in a company that violates human rights, contributes to an occupation and war,” Valle said in a telephone interview.

The company, owned by Israel’s richest businessman, Lev Leviev, invests in settlements and owns construction companies involved in building both the separation wall and illegal settlements in the West Bank.

Valle’s party is encouraging the ethics committee to be thorough in its assessment, but added that if it finds investing in Africa Israel Investments ethical, “then the ethics guidelines must be re-written.”

The visit was, in part, to solidify the Socialist Left position over the ethics committee findings and over Norwegian investments in the Israeli company, but it was also a chance to “see for ourselves” the realities in the area.

Delegates who had never been to the area were “shocked” at the “strategically planned settlements,” checkpoints and 30-foot-high border wall snaking across the West Bank, as well as “some heavy destruction” in the Gaza Strip. The delegation, including three members of Parliament, was denied entry to the coastal area Tuesday without explanation. A second attempt was successful.

Following the tour, which will finish this week, MP Valle noted that the delegation could not help asking themselves, “After seeing the situation here; does Israel really want peace?”

Israeli forces shoot young Palestinian girl in Ni’lin

For Immediate Release:

Summer Amira was shot with live ammunition by Israeli forces
Summer Amira was shot with live ammunition by Israeli forces

4:30pm, 15 May 2009: A 12-year old girl has been shot with 0.22 calibre live ammunition in Ni’lin

Summer Amira, was shot by Israeli forces as she was standing on the roof of her home. Amira was shot in her lower arm, near her elbow around 4:30pm.

“Summer and I were standing on the roof watching soldiers enter our village. Summer was standing behind me, leaning against a pole and the bullet flew past my head and hit her arm. The soldier was aiming at us. Two weeks ago, my other sister, Raja, was injured in the leg with a sound grenade when the army tried to occupy a home to shoot at demonstrators. – Fatma Amira (14), Summer’s sister.

In total, 27 persons have been shot by Israeli forces with live ammunition in Ni’lin.

The 22-calibre live bullet, fired from the Rutger rifle, was reintroduced in January 2009, despite military previous orders to stop its use in 2001.

According to B’tselem,

In 2001, Maj.-Gen. Menachem Finkelstein, then judge advocate general, ordered that use of the Ruger rifle be stopped. The decision followed the killing of several children in the Gaza Strip by Ruger-rifle fire, and an order by OC Central Command to cease using the rifle, which was given after finding that soldiers often used it without justification against demonstrators. On 27 December 2001, Ha’aretz quoted a senior military official as saying that “the mistake was that the Ruger came to be seen as a means to disperse demonstrators, contrary to its original designation as a weapon like any other.”
On 10 January 2009, following the renewed use of the Ruger in demonstrations, Ha’aretz reported the comments of an “IDF official”, who said that the Ruger causes less harm, and is less lethal, than “rubber bullets.”

Israeli occupation forces have murdered four Ni’lin residents during demonstrations against the confiscation of their land and critically injured one international solidarity activist.

Ahmed Mousa (10) was shot in the forehead with live ammunition on 29 July 2008. The following day, Yousef Amira (17) was shot twice with rubber-coated steel bullets, leaving him brain dead. He died a week later on 4 August 2008. Arafat Rateb Khawaje (22), was the third Ni’lin resident to be killed by Israeli forces. He was shot in the back with live ammunition on 28 December 2008. That same day, Mohammed Khawaje (20), was shot in the head with live ammunition, leaving him brain dead. He died three days in a Ramallah hospital. Tristan Anderson (37), an American citizen, was shot with a high velocity tear gas projectile on 13 March 2009 and is currently in critical condition. In total, 19 persons have been shot by Israeli forces with live ammunition.

Since May 2008, residents of Ni’lin village have been demonstrating against construction of the Apartheid Wall. Despite being deemed illegal by the International Court of Justice in 2004, the occupation continues to build a Wall, further annexing Palestinian land.

Ni’lin will lose approximately 2500 dunums of agricultural land when the construction of the Wall is completed. Ni’lin consisted of 57,000 dunums in 1948, reduced to 33,000 dunums in 1967, currently is 10,000 dunums and will be 7,500 dunums after construction of the Wall.

Life among the ruins in Gaza

Amira Hass | Ha’aretz

15 May 2009

Wadi Gaza is an agricultural region southeast of Gaza City. The ruins of Hussein al Aaidy’s family home are immediately apparent. The houses (and several other heaps of ruins) are scattered among budding hills, lazing goats and fields that have been plowed but not sown. Up until nine years ago, these houses were surrounded by orchards and other fruit trees. Until the Israel Defense Forces bulldozers uprooted everything in order to safeguard the Israelis driving to the settlement of Netzarim.

The thousands of heaps of ruins in the Strip have now become part of the landscape. What attracts attention is when one pile of ruins or another disappears. The Gaza Public Works Bureau has already solicited bids for clearing away the ruins of several public buildings and several mosques. Building contractors have begun to evacuate the rubble, and tents have been set up on the site in order to serve the public and for prayers.

But these are the exceptions. There is no point in clearing away the ruins of the 4,000 buildings and homes that have been totally destroyed, so long as Israel does not permit building materials to be brought into the Strip.

The Gazan Ministry of Public Works also warns citizens not to clear away ruins through private initiative: It’s too dangerous. At least 50,000 people, members of 8,000 families whose homes have been destroyed, know that the temporary solution they have found is liable to become a long-term one.

“And that’s not a solution,” says Al Aaidy, whose family is now dispersed among several houses, far from the plot of land they bought years ago and cultivated with a great deal of love. His mother, Kamela, 80, refused to leave her land.

The expulsion from Be’er Sheva in 1948 was enough for her. Now she lives by herself in what used to be the family goat pen (the goats fled or were killed: One hen survived and is still alive and pecking in the soil of the goat pen). She stores some of her possessions in a rusty bus that they dragged to the site a long time ago. She heats up tea on a bonfire.

“You can see the ruins of the house, you can’t see the ruins in our soul,” says Hussein al Aaidy, a man in his 50s. He was a Fatah activist, a prisoner in Israel from the 1970s who was freed during the prisoner exchange deal in 1985. After his release, he worked at several jobs, so as to be able to build a house for his family.

The Al Aaidys thought that the ground invasion of Israel’s Gaza campaign would be like the previous ones: that the shelling and the shooting would be outside the house, and that they would be safe inside it. His brothers’ families, who live nearby in buildings with ceilings of asbestos and tin, joined him on Saturday, January 3, 2009, on the eve of the ground attack and when the bombing intensified.

“All of us, 30 people, were in one inner room, on the second floor,” said Kamela this past Sunday. “I was lying on a mattress, I wrapped my head in a mandil [a head kerchief] and a thick scarf. Because of the cold.”

At about 8 P.M., something pierced the air and the three stories of the concrete house: A shell? A missile from a helicopter or a drone? They didn’t know. Dust, fragments of concrete and shouting filled the room in which they were crowded. Kamela al Aaidy would later discover that her head kerchief was soaked with blood.

She had been wounded by shrapnel in her head; today, she still gets dizzy when she gets up and walks. They ran from the partially demolished house to one of the buildings in the yard – in the hope that the forces that were shelling would see them and understand that they were civilians. Six people were injured by shrapnel: Kamela, her sister-in-law and four children. They contacted friends and relatives to call for medical assistance. They discovered that the IDF was not allowing rescue teams access to them.

Haaretz accompanied the efforts of Physicians for Human Rights to have them rescued, and reported daily and in real time about the situation: They were almost without food, without medicine, little water, cold, shelling and firing all around. But only on Friday, January 9, almost seven days after they had been wounded – after exhausting negotiations on the part of PHR and phone conversations conducted by Hussein al Aaidy himself with soldiers or officers in the Coordination and Liaison Authority for the Gaza Strip – was the first evacuation allowed: four of the wounded and four escorts.

Healthy carried the wounded

They walked for about 1.5 kilometers, the healthy ones carrying the seriously injured on stretchers: The wounds of the children Ragheda and Nur, who were injured by shrapnel all over their bodies, were beginning to become infected; they began to lose consciousness. Before their evacuation, Hussein had cut into Ragheda’s flesh with a knife – two of his brothers held her as she screamed and cried – and sterilized the wound with salt water. The grandmother, Kamela, shakes her head as she tells us this, as though she wanted to chase away the memory.

The next day, Saturday morning, a week after they were shelled, the healthy ones and the two wounded women also left. They understood that it was dangerous to remain in the area, as “every moment we expected another shell to fall on us, to be wounded again, perhaps killed,” explains Hussein, almost apologizing for “abandoning” the house. Their departure was preceded by negotiations over the phone conducted by Al Aaidy, who speaks Hebrew, with an officer or soldier in the liaison office.

“They wanted us to take a six-kilometer detour: I refused,” he recalls. “They demanded that we go south, to the area of Netzarim. I refused. In the end, they agreed to let us go north, near the Karni Crossing. But there were conditions: That each of us would be a meter away from the next person. That we wouldn’t stop. That we wouldn’t put down the children, whom we adults were carrying on our backs. That we wouldn’t put down my mother, whom two of us carried together. They told me: If we can’t count the 22 people who left the house, anyone who sees you from a helicopter or a tank, will fire at you.”

One of the conditions was that they would carry a white flag, and that scared them most of all. “I was in all the wars and none of them was so difficult. In none of them did they kill people waving white flags, as they did this time,” explained Kamela. “And when we marched, I was already in despair, I wanted them to put me down. Leave me on the road and I’ll die, I told my sons.”

The exhausted convoy marched for about 700 meters, according to Hussein al Aaidy’s estimate, until they encountered a group of tanks. One soldier got out of the tank, aimed his rifle at the convoy and ordered them to stop. “That was lucky, that way we could rest a little, we put down the children and Mother,” recalls Al Aaidy with a little smile. The soldiers ordered him to approach. “There was a dog with the soldiers. They cocked their weapons. As though they wanted to scare us. I told the soldier: We’re leaving by prior arrangement, contact your commanders. And the soldier answered me: ‘I won’t contact anyone.’ We waited like that for 20 minutes. The way a person waits for death.” The three kilometers until they reached the ambulances took about an hour and a half to two hours – they no longer remember precisely.

And since then they can’t find a place for themselves, says Al Aaidy. When the attack stopped, they were astonished to discover that the IDF had blown up their house.

“From the school where we hid during the attack we wandered to relatives, from those relatives to other relatives, from them we dispersed among rented apartments. The children switched schools, they can’t concentrate on their studies and don’t show any interest, all their books and games and notebooks were buried, everyone is jittery, they quarrel, the children don’t want to be here, on the land next to the demolished house, they wake up at night from nightmares, shouting. And our case is relatively mild: There are no dead, as in other families.” Al Aaidy shows me an electronic board he found among the ruins, apparently from a missile that landed on the house.

“If all this science is designed to destroy, then maybe it would be better to go back to the Jahaliya,” he muses, referring to the pre-Islamic age of ignorance.

The IDF Spokesman responds: “From the moment of the attack, direct contact was established between the affected residents and the army, and an attempt was made to evacuate them from the Gaza Strip, so they could receive medical care in Israel.

“The residents were evacuated at the first opportunity at which they would not have been exposed to mortal danger from the fighting that was taking place in the area. In order to provide additional information about the attack, we would need precise location coordinates. As we were not provided with that information, we are unable to clarify the matter.”