A response to the EU Boycott of Yesha Israel

After Jersey City, Monsey and New York,Israel needs to have an Emergency Aliyah program

Some really creative ideas to deal with the EU Boycott of Yesha Israel

EU and UNHCR Blacklisting effects on Arabs

EU Lawfare and A 5-step plan to fight the ICC

Terror-linked and boycott promoting NGOs behind potential ICC investigation

EU report recommends boycott on Israeli settlement products

The Nazi boycott of Jewish businesses is the model for the current EU guidelines for boycotting Israeli products. Leftist policies are, by their very nature, totalitarian in impulse and execution http://moshe.blogit.fi/luokka/countries/israel/boycott/

The Nazi boycott of Jewish businesses is the model for the current EU guidelines for boycotting Israeli products. Leftist policies are, by their very nature, totalitarian in impulse and execution http://moshe.blogit.fi/luokka/countries/israel/boycott/

The European Union has recommended that its 27 member states “prevent” all financial transactions that support Israel’s settlement activities in the West Bank.

In its Jerusalem Report 2012, an internal report written by the EU mission heads in Jerusalem and Ramallah, the European Union suggested that member states “prevent, discourage and raise awareness about problematic implications of financial transactions, including foreign direct investments, from within the EU in support of settlement activities, infrastructure and services,” the French news agency AFP reported.

In a strongly worded 15-page report, the EU also called on members to “ensure that imports of settlement products do not benefit from preferential tariffs and make sure that all such products are clearly labeled as originating from Israeli-occupied areas.”

It also warns that EU programs should not be “used to support settlements and settlement-related activity, including funding for research, education or technological cooperation.”

EU court rules products from Israeli settlements must be labeled

Barak Ravid of Israel’s Channel 13 news Nov 12, 2019 https://www.axios.com/european-union-israeli-settlement-products-labels-d557758a-76aa-4059-ba07-e3169b4373e0.html

The Court of Justice of the European Union

The European Court of Justice ruled Tuesday that all European Union member states must label goods from Israeli settlements in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights — identifying them as products from an Israeli settlement.

Why it matters: The court’s decision could have a big influence on Israeli trade with the EU — and on U.S. trade with the continent. Israel asked both the Trump administration and Congress to put pressure on the EU not to implement the ruling.

  • The court ruled that “Israel is present in the territories concerned as an occupying power and not as a sovereign entity.”

What happened: In 2015 the EU published guidelines for labeling goods from Israeli settlements. At the time, some EU member states implemented the guidelines and many ignored them.

  • After France decided to implement the guidelines, Yaakov Berg, an Israeli businessman who owns a winery in Psagot settlement near Ramallah in the West Bank, went to court in France.
  • A French judge issued an injunction and asked the French government not to label settlement goods until the European Court of Justice ruled on the matter.

Last June, the EU’s legal adviser gave the court a legal opinion stressing that goods from Israeli settlements must be labeled so consumers would not be misinformed about their origin and to make clear they were not produced in Israel.

  • This opinion led the Israeli foreign ministry to predict that the court would rule to label goods from settlements.
  • It asked Berg to withdraw his lawsuit in order to prevent establishing a legal precedent, but he refused.

The big picture: Berg used U.S. law firms and lobbyists to mobilize support in Congress and the State Department. The Israeli government also asked for the Trump administration’s help.

  • Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu raised the issue with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin.
  • Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) sent a letter to the EU’s ambassador in Washington, warning him about potential consequences the ruling could have on trade between the U.S. and the EU due to U.S. laws against the BDS movement.
  • Sens. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) and Rob Portman (R-Ohio) also sent a letter to U.S. trade representative Robert Lighthizer asking him to utilize a provision in U.S. trade deals with the EU as a way to prevent the implementation of the ruling

Regavim @RegavimIsrael Nov 27, 2019 tweet Today's award for most courageous politician: @LanceForman of @brexitparty_uk for his 1-minute blast of truth. Hello, @EUpalestinians - anyone home?

Regavim @RegavimIsrael Nov 27, 2019 tweet Today’s award for most courageous politician: @LanceForman of @brexitparty_uk for his 1-minute blast of truth. Hello, @EUpalestinians – anyone home?

 

EU Parliamentarian, Lance Forman, tells the truth about Israeli “illegal settlements”

Margaret Thatcher’s Amazing Prophecy On The EU

Tyler Durden 19December2019 https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/margaret-thatchers-amazing-prophecy-eu

Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk,

On Sep 19, 1992 Margaret Thatcher gave a visionary speech at the World Economic Development Conference regarding the EU.

(sottotitolato) Margaret Thatcher celebrates ERM exit and foretells the disasters of EMU

Compare the EU boycott with the Arab boycott:

The Arab League Boycott and WTO Accession: Can Foreign Policy Excuse Discriminatory Sanctions?

George Mason Law & Economics Research Paper No. 03-22

Posted: 14 May 2003 Download Paper Click to download PDF file  The-Arab-League-Boycott-and-WTO-Accession-SSRN-id406780

Eugene Kontorovich

George Mason University – Antonin Scalia Law School, Faculty

Abstract

The central principle of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, now incorporated into the rules of the World Trade Organization, is the prohibition of discriminatory restrictions on international trade. However, some scholars contend that GATT applies only to trade restrictions adopted to protect domestic industry from foreign competition or for other economic purposes, and not to restrictions adopted for non-economic foreign policy reasons. While this purported foreign policy exception has been endorsed by the Restatement, it has received little critical attention from commentators. Recent developments in the WTO have made the legitimacy of the exception a matter of pressing concern not just to scholars of international trade law but to the free trade system itself. Saudi Arabia is expected to be admitted into the organization in the next few years. However, Saudi Arabia maintains a total boycott of Israel and a secondary and tertiary boycott of firms and individuals in the United States and elsewhere that trade with Israel. The boycott is part of the Arab League Boycott of Israel. This Article uses the occasion of Saudi Arabia’s accession bid to examine the unresolved issue of whether GATT applies to trade restrictions imposed for purely foreign policy purposes. It finds that such an exception would be inconsistent with the language, structure, usage, purpose, and history of GATT. This in turn shows that Saudi Arabia’s secondary and tertiary boycott violates WTO rules. Thus the accession of nations, like Saudi Arabia, that maintain the secondary and tertiary prongs of the Arab League Boycott would undermine the WTO’s commitment to free trade and injure existing members. The Article concludes that these harms could not be redressed within the WTO framework, and thus the best way to avoid them is to condition accession on a termination of the secondary and tertiary boycott.

Keywords: international law, international trade

JEL Classification: F01, F02, F35

Israel needs to take the EU to the WTO. This violates all trade agreements and the WTO can award triple damages on all Israeli imports to the EU. That would be very beneficial as Israel could then claim everything they produce and sell is subject to the illegal EU boycott and get triple what they would normally get

How the “Blaocklisting of Israeli Companies” will effect the local Arab population

UNHCR Expected to Release Israeli Company ‘Blacklist’

The only thing the EU and the UNHCR are concerned about is the destruction of Israel and the Jews. They don’t give a Damn about the local Arab pupulaion.

Symbol that Jews were forced to wear during the Holocaust, so that they could be identified as Jews.

Symbol that Jews were forced to wear during the Holocaust, so that they could be identified as Jews.

Comments: The EU just as the Arabs, wants to bring back Classic  Antisemitism labeling as with the Yellow Star of David of the NAZI and Medieval Period to Israeli products because Israel is the TRUE JEWISH State and the true homeland of the Jews.

The European Union Labels Itself Biased

Amb. Alan Baker November 13, 2019 http://jcpa.org/the-european-union-labels-itself-biased/

The European Court of Justice issued a controversial ruling on November 12, 2019, and declared:

Foodstuffs originating in the territories occupied by the State of Israel must bear the indication of their territory of origin, accompanied, where those foodstuffs come from an Israeli settlement within that territory, by the indication of that provenance.1

Any reaction to the EU policy of labeling products manufactured in Israeli settlements should consider the following points:

The EU-directed policy requiring member states to label products made in Israeli settlements is intended to harm Israel and Israel only, as a distinct political action and as a means of pressuring Israel politically.

This measure has no substantive connection with whether settlement products meet EU and individual state sanitary, health, hygienic, production, packaging, cleanliness, or other quality standards. It is a purely selective, discriminatory, and political imposition.

The EU labeling policy is based on a unilateral EU premise that Israel’s settlements are contrary to international law. This premise runs counter to other relevant legal opinions as to the legitimacy of Israel’s settlement policy in accordance with the accepted international norms regarding the administration of territory. Additionally, and more importantly, the issue of Israel’s settlements is an agreed negotiating issue between Israel and the PLO, pursuant to the Oslo Accords. Thus, the EU labeling directive is tantamount to interference in, and prejudgment of an agreed negotiating issue between Israel and the Palestinians.

The EU labeling requirement is an overt, political measure strengthening the already existing links between the EU and the predominantly European BDS campaign. It represents full identification of the EU and its member states with the aims of the BDS movement to undermine Israel and to weaken the relations between European countries and Israel.

The selective and discriminatory EU labeling policy directed solely against Israel blatantly ignores the numerous situations in the world where states administering territories have transferred hundreds and thousands of their own citizens into the territories they are administering, such as Turkey in Northern Cyprus, Morocco in the occupied territory of Western Sahara, Russia in occupied Ukrainian territory, and the like. This is indicative of an acute double standard in EU policies, raising pertinent questions regarding the real motivation behind such policy.

This selective and discriminatory EU labeling policy is both immoral and hypocritical, driven by manipulation and political pressure by those within the EU who have consistently acted to push member states to interfere in the Middle East dispute and take biased and unilateral positions intended to undermine the integrity of the peace negotiations in a manner directed at harming Israel. The EU labeling policy, in effect, cancels any bona fide European pretension to participate in the peace negotiation process between Israel and the Palestinians. Cooperating with the EU labeling directive means that the EU has taken sides and has prejudged one of the central negotiating issues – that of settlements – which is still an open issue on the Israeli-Palestinian negotiating table.

EU member states that support and implement the discriminatory labeling policy will, in fact, by taking such a biased and discriminatory position, remove themselves from any cycle of involvement in the peace process, and will, in effect, be sabotaging the process and damaging the integrity and bona fides of the negotiations.

The EU policy undermines the EU status as one of the signatories to the Oslo Accords, together with the leaders of the United States, Russia, Norway, Egypt, and Jordan; the UN also endorsed the Accords. It also undermines the status of the EU as a member of the Middle East Quartet, together with the UN, Russia, and the United States. Self-respecting European states that genuinely believe in the importance of advancing the Israel-Palestinian peace negotiation process cannot identify with or implement such an EU discriminatory measure intended to harm Israel. Even-handed and fair-minded states will not allow themselves to be manipulated by politically-driven elements within the EU seeking to weaken Israel, the integrity of the peace process, and their own interests.

European Union Slaps ‘New Kind Of Yellow Star On Jewish-Made Products’

A survey of 2,504 French adults found that 69 percent of respondents would not buy products labeled ‘made in Israel.’

By
19November2019 https://thefederalist.com/2019/11/19/european-union-slaps-new-kind-of-yellow-star-on-jewish-made-products/

Europe’s highest court isn’t exactly telling everybody to boycott Israeli food and wine. But they’re doing their darnedest to ensure Europeans don’t buy them.

For anyone who missed the news, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruled last week that food and wine produced by Jewish Israelis beyond the Green Line must be explicitly marked: “‘Israeli settlement’ or equivalent needs to be added, in brackets, for example. Therefore, expressions such as ‘product from the Golan Heights (Israeli settlement)’ or ‘product from the West Bank (Israeli settlement)’ could be used.”

Eugene Kontorovich, director of the Center for International Law in the Middle East at George Mason University Scalia Law School, considers the new labels “a new kind of Yellow Star on Jewish-made products.” He told The Federalist that the CJEU’s labeling requirements “are not geographic—they are not about where something was made but by whom.” Kontorovich added, “They’re not even pretending that the rules they’re applying to Israel are the rules they’re applying to the rest of the world.”

Readers may recall that when the court’s advocate general suggested such labeling earlier this year, his reasoning was that consumers needed “neutral and objective information.” But this outcome is neither neutral nor objective. As Marc Greendorfer, president of Zachor Legal Institute, which battles Israel boycotts, emailed, “That the court contravened established principles of international law to wrongly stipulate the status of the disputed areas (as occupied) exposes the fact that this ruling was about taking sides in a political dispute.”

“Labels are not the place to engage in political debate,” Brooke Goldstein, executive director of the Lawfare Project, which participated in this case, told The Federalist. Indeed, product labeling is supposed to be about health and safety. Labels also help consumers shop “ethically” or “responsibly.” But if a consumer factors politics into those decisions and wants to avoid Israeli goods, why is it so important to specify where in Israel those goods are produced?

According to a 2017 poll conducted by Opinion Way for the Lawfare Project, a survey of 2,504 French adults found that 69 percent of respondents would not buy products labeled “made in Israel.” That number rose to 75 percent if labels read “West Bank, Israeli colony/settlement.” So more detailed labeling would clearly shift some shoppers’ habits, but those figures are already startlingly high.

While the CJEU may not be declaring a boycott with this ruling— after all, it remains legal to import Israeli goods — they are nudging consumers in that direction. Even the U.S. State Department, which typically avoids criticizing allies, expressed “deep concern,” calling “the circumstances surrounding the labeling requirement . . . suggestive of anti-Israel bias.” They also rightly noted that “this requirement serves only to encourage, facilitate, and promote boycotts, divestments, and sanctions (BDS) against Israel,” a movement Germany’s own parliament considers antisemitic, and even Nazi-like.

This decision is not focused on informing consumers about unconscionable behavior across the globe (e.g., the Chinese government’s treatment of Uyghurs) or highlighting the world’s many disputed territories (see: Western Sahara, Cyprus, and Crimea for starters). It is about ostracizing the world’s only Jewish nation and unilaterally redrawing Israel’s borders via economic pressure.

The aforementioned French survey underscores just how widespread popular prejudice against Israel is in France, long home to Europe’s largest Jewish community. Rather than calm that prejudice, the CJEU panders to it, inflames it, and now embeds it in law. So it won’t be surprising if antagonism to Israel keeps rising in France and the rest of Europe. Stigmatizing Israel now has the gloss of official, legal respectability.

The whole episode is offensive. Consider, this long-awaited decision was scheduled for release on November 12. The U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum reminds us that date is significant, as “just 2 days after the end of Kristallnacht [in 1938], the Nazi government issued the Decree on the Elimination of the Jews from Economic Life. Banned from owning shops or selling any kind of good or service, most Jews lost their livelihoods entirely.”

Further, by establishing a unique standard for Israel, this decision fits the internationally accepted definition of antisemitism, cited in the United Nations’ recent report on global antisemitism. So it’s rich for the European Commission to tell Fox News, “Any suggestion that indication of origin on products coming from Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory or in the occupied Golan has anything to do with targeting Jews or anti-Semitism is unacceptable. The EU stands strongly and unequivocally against any form of anti-Semitism.”

Check out that loaded word choice. Then consider that such critiques are fair game. The EU does not stand unequivocally against antisemitism. There are bright spots, like Austria’s second largest city banning support for BDS. However, European Jews are acutely aware that antisemitism is widespread and dangerous.

EU officials like Michael O’Flaherty, director of the European Union’s Fundamental Rights Agency, know that in spite of the many reported antisemitic crimes across the EU, 80 percent remain uncounted. “As one person asked [O’Flaherty], ‘Why would I report antisemitism to an antisemite?’” Over in Britain, which has not quite left the EU, nearly half of British Jews have said they “would ‘seriously consider’ emigrating if [Labour Party leader Jeremy] Corbyn is elected prime minister [in December].”

Seventy-four years after the Holocaust’s end, the EU is no haven for Jews. Nor is it a particularly reliable friend to Israel. Calling the decision “disgraceful,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) told The Federalist, “This labeling singles out Jews who live in communities where Europeans don’t think they should be allowed to live and identifies them for boycotts. It is reminiscent of the darkest moments in Europe’s history.”

Indeed, the CJEU may have forgotten, but world Jewry hasn’t. We also know that discrimination and other harms that start with Jews never end with us. So whether or not the timing was coincidental, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s announcing a reversal of Obama-era policy regarding Israel’s settlements certainly looks fortuitous, because this fight is far from over.

Melissa Langsam Braunstein, a former U.S. Department of State speechwriter, is an independent writer in Washington DC and a senior contributor to The Federalist. Her work has appeared in The New York Times, National Review Online, and RealClearPolitics, among others. She has appeared on EWTN and WMAL. Melissa shares all of her writing on her website and tweets as @slowhoneybee.

EU Reveals its True Colors

by Peter Martino July 24, 2013 http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3867/eu-israel-directive

The EU guidelines are clearly anti-Semitic: they are a unique set of guidelines crafted for the occasion of targeting Jews. The EU does not ask similar guarantees of China for Tibet, Turkey for Cyprus, or Indonesia for Western Papua.

Last week, the European Union issued guidelines regarding the use of EU funds in Israel. From now on, Israeli institutions cooperating with the EU or benefitting from EU funding must demonstrate that they have no direct or indirect links to Judea, Samaria, East Jerusalem or the Golan Heights. The guidelines, drawn up by the EU bureaucracy in Brussels, bind the EU, a supranational organization of 28 European nations, and one of the world’s largest donors of development aid. The guidelines also forbid any funding, cooperation, awarding of scholarships, research funds or prizes to anyone residing in Jewish settlements in Israeli territories outside Israel’s 1967 borders.

Jerusalem Cats Comments:
Flag_of_the_NSDAP_(1920–1945).svgI totally agree with labeling products. All products from Europe should require a Nazi Swastika on it and a total ban on European Cars and other products. This is besides the standard labeling laws for GMO products which should be banned anyway.

Right-to-Know-GMO-Labeling

This is exactly why s.720 – the Israel anti-boycott act is so important.

Israel Anti-Boycott Act

This bill declares that Congress: (1) opposes the United Nations Human Rights Council resolution of March 24, 2016, which urges countries to pressure companies to divest from, or break contracts with, Israel; and (2) encourages full implementation of the United States-Israel Strategic Partnership Act of 2014 through enhanced, governmentwide, coordinated U.S.-Israel scientific and technological cooperation in civilian areas.

The bill amends the Export Administration Act of 1979 to declare that it shall be U.S. policy to oppose:

  • requests by foreign countries to impose restrictive practices or boycotts against other countries friendly to the United States or against U.S. persons; and
  • restrictive trade practices or boycotts fostered or imposed by an international governmental organization, or requests to impose such practices or boycotts, against Israel.

The bill prohibits any U.S. person engaged interstate or foreign commerce from supporting:

  • any request by a foreign country to impose any boycott against a country that is friendly to the United States and that is not itself the object of any form of boycott pursuant to United States law or regulation, or
  • any boycott fostered or imposed by any international governmental organization against Israel or any request by any international governmental organization to impose such a boycott.

The bill amends the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 to include as a reason for the Export-Import Bank to deny credit applications for the export of goods and services between the United States and foreign countries, opposition to policies and actions that are politically motivated and are intended to penalize or otherwise limit commercial relations specifically with citizens or residents of Israel, entities organized under the laws of Israel, or the government of Israel.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/720

Israel needs to place a 100% Tariff on all EU Goods

Israel needs to have a Crash Emergency program to develop the IAI Lavi Fighter and reverse engineer any product that is imported into Israel.

Israel needs to have an Emergency Aliyah program that will entail both Nefesh B’Nefesh, The Jewish Agency and Israeli family contacting their friends and family members still living outside of Israel.

  • Have TV commercials in Hebrew telling Israelis that it is a matter of life and death to get home.

2 Israeli women mugged at New York subway station

Two Israeli tourists attacked, robbed at knife-point in mugging at Brooklyn subway station.

Arutz Sheva Staff, 08December2019 http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/272879

Two Israeli women in their early 20s visiting New York were assaulted and robbed during a mugging at a subway station in Brooklyn, CBS News reported Saturday.
Part of the incident was filmed by security cameras at the station, and police have opened an investigation into the robbery.
The two tourists were mugged after getting off a subway train while making their way to the station exit.
Two assailants, both of whom had their faces covered, attacked the two tourists while brandishing a knife and a taser.
The Israeli tourists returned to Israel a day after the incident.

מבט – גל פיגועים בארצות הברית והחמור שבהם הלילה בניו יורק | כאן 11 לשעבר רשות השידור

Israeli Ministry of Aliyah and Integration ad – יום הזיכרון

Ministry of Aliyah and IntegrationKlitaGov
הגיע הזמן לחזור לארץ – תכנית ההטבות לתושבים חוזרים. בדיקת זכאות, רישום להטבות עבור תושבים חוזרים, יצירת קשר עם המשרד לקליטת העלייה


לפני שאבא יהפוך ל”Daddy” הגיע הזמן לחזור לארץ

הם ישראלים, הילדים שלהם לא… הגיע הזמן לחזור לארץ – תכנית ההטבות לתושבים חוזרים באתר משרד הקליטה…

  • Have TV commercials in English reminding Jews about Kristallnacht and the riots in the streets.

    Kristallnacht: Night Of Broken Glass

  • Have TV commercials reminding the Diaspora Jews about Israels wonderful healthcare, schools, clean air and low unemployment rate. Remind everyone that Israel is the Startup Nation for innovation. Remind everyone that Israel has one of the highest standards of living and rates of longevity.

    Israeli Health Care

    Watch How Israeli High School Seniors Prepare for IDF

    ISRAEL START-UP NATION

  • Have all EL-AL members (Pilots, Stewardess) in full combat gear and armed when at US and EU airports.

  • Arrest all CIA, DIA, DEA, FBI, MI 5/6, etc of USA, Britain & EU countries agents in Israel (including news reporters), throw them in jail, quick harsh trials for espionage, sedition, provocation of unrest & rebellion etc, harsh sentences; THEN demand release of Pollard in exchange.

    Riots in Los Angeles California; Just remember that the only country that the Jews have is Israel אין לי ארץ אחרת

    Riots in Los Angeles California; Just remember that the only country that the Jews have is Israel
    אין לי ארץ אחרת

  • Publish “dangerous region & no protection” warnings for vacationers or businessmen visit in those countries.

  • Arrest, imprison, charge with espionage & sedition all missionaries.

  • Israel needs laws similar to:
    American Service-Members’ Protection Act
    ASPA authorizes the U.S. president to use “all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any U.S. or allied personnel being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court“. That includes; potential economic sanctions against member and host nations that support or aid the ICC actions and revoke visas for members and employees of the International Criminal Court.

    The act prohibits federal, state and local governments and agencies (including courts and law enforcement agencies) from assisting the court. For example, it prohibits the extradition of any person from the U.S. to the Court; it prohibits the transfer of classified national security information and law enforcement information to the court.

    From The Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies BESA https://besacenter.org/

    The Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies

    The Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies BESA https://besacenter.org/

    Fighting the Demonization of Israel at the International Criminal Court

    By Prof. Eytan Gilboa BESA Center Perspectives Paper No. 1,386, 30December2019 https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/israel-international-criminal-court/
    Click to download the full report Click to download PDF file 1386-Fighting-Demonization-of-Israel-at-the-ICC-Gilboa-final

    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Fatou Bensouda, the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) at the Hague, has decided to indict senior Israeli policymakers and military officers for committing war crimes in the West Bank and Gaza. Her decision is baseless, preposterous, and discriminatory, and it violates the ICC’s own mission and rules. Bensouda’s action should be placed within the wider context of the Palestinian disinformation, delegitimization, and demonization campaign against Israel at international organizations. Israel should discredit and delegitimize the ICC in turn via aggressive political measures and collaboration with concerned liberal democracies, primarily the US.


    What should Israel do?
    Israel must fight the ICC through aggressive political means. Bensouda joined those who delegitimize and demonize Israel. The best response would be to delegitimize and penalize her and the ICC via an alliance of countries under US leadership along the lines adopted by the Trump administration. If the pre-trial judges approve Bensouda’s request, Israel should ask the US to fulfill its commitment, cancel the visas of Bensouda, the ICC judges, and its investigators, and apply other severe sanctions against them. [EDD: such as treating them as a “Terrorist Organization” which would include potential economic sanctions against member and host nations that support or aid the ICC actions for members and employees of the International Criminal Court. and “Targeted Killings” of the ICC Staff. Just as the US and Israel do with ISIS.]

    Like the US and other countries, Israel should ban entry by ICC investigators into Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza; pass laws that protect Israeli officials and officers from ICC directives and potential indictments; and sign bilateral agreements with states refusing to comply with ICC orders and arrest warrants. Israel should also consider sanctions against the Palestinian Authority, which, with Bensouda’s help, started the ICC preliminary investigation. These steps can help to expose the ICC’s complete lack of credibility or legitimacy.

  • If the above did not work then: Wanted DEAD Bounty Posters of the International Criminal Court and The European Court of Justice Judges, along with any Court that try to hold Israeli Officials on “War Crimes”

  • Israel needs to pull out of all joint EU-Israeli projects.

  • Israel needs to ban all EU and EU funded Leftest Israeli NGOs such as Peace Now.

  • Persona Non Grata Catherine Ashton, Baroness Ashton of Upholland, Ex US Presidents  Jimmy Carter, Barack Hussein Obama and deny visas to all officials of the EU Governments.

  • Israel needs to arrest all UN workers as Enemy Combatants and throw them into prison internment Camps (like the US did to the Japanese living in the US during World War 2) until Jonathan Pollard and the other Jews that are in the American Gulags are released and safely in Israel.[Remember the UN’s 1975 United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3379  of which “determine[d] that Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination” ]

  • Israel needs to declare that J-Street, CAIR, CodePink, IfNotNow, the College JVP and other anti-Israel Antisemitic Hate groups are listed as “Terrorists”. If Turkey can list the Kurdish PKK as a terrorist group, then Israel can list J-Street as a terrorist group. Once listed as terrorists all the Banks and PayPal will be required to cut off their Bank accounts. Yes, there are “Self-Hating Jews” out there because they were not raised Jewish and they practice another religion of “Tekken Olam” Reform Judaism

This is besides Prayer, Tuvah and Tzedakah.

That should wake someone up.

Thing are looking up!


European governments earmarked funds for anti-Israel lawfare at ICC

Pro-Israel NGOs say they were snubbed by the Hague.

By LAHAV HARKOV 24December2019 15:07https://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/European-governments-earmarked-funds-for-anti-Israel-lawfare-at-ICC-611975

International Criminal Court

THE HAGUE, NETHERLANDS View of the International Criminal Court

Several European governments donated funds to organizations specifically for the purpose of fighting Israel in international legal forums, including the International Criminal Court, which announced last week that it will investigate of alleged war crimes committed by Israel and Palestinians.

 

Among the governments funding lawfare against Israel via Palestinians and Israeli organizations are Switzerland, the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, France and the EU, the think tank NGO Monitor found.

 

The contract between the Swiss government and Al-Dameer Association for Human Rights, based in Gaza, specifies under the category of “lobbying, advocacy and networking” that the NGO plans to “provide and reports to the ICC on human rights violations committed by IOF,” which stands for “Israel Occupation Forces.”

 

Switzerland’s contract with the Gaza-based Palestinian Center for Human Rights lists among its planned activities “conducting communications with the office of the General Prosecutor of the ICC and other international litigation mechanisms,” “sending communications to international litigation mechanisms,” with the ICC mentioned specifically,” and “enabling victims and witnesses to appear before int’l litigation mechanisms.”

 

PCHR’s stated measures of success include the number of meetings it has with the General Prosecutor of the ICC, the amount of communication it has with international litigation mechanisms and the number of witnesses it sends to them.
Both of the aforementioned organizations have ties with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), which is a designated terrorist group in the EU, US, Canada and Israel. They have held joint events in recent years, and the deputy chairman of the PCHR’s board is the former lead of the PFLP’s military arm.

 

The organization Al Mezan, received 450,000 Euros from the EU in 2017-2020 and about 200,000 Euros from the Netherlands in 2018. The NGO listed “contribution to the enforcement of the international human rights mechanisms” as one of its goals in its contract with the Netherlands. The organization petitions international legal bodies to seek arrest warrants against Israeli officials, among other lawfare campaigns.

 

From 2014 to 2017, the governments of Sweden, Switzerland Denmark and the Netherlands funded the “Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Secretariat,” meant to support “current and future documentation and investigation efforts by CSOs [civil society organizations] for the purposes of assisting and supporting national and international mechanisms.”

 

The aforementioned organizations all received funding from this consortium, as did several Israeli NGOs, including B’Tselem, which “acts primarily to change Israeli policy in the Occupied Territories and ensure that its government…protects the human rights of residents there and complies with its obligations under international law.”

 

B’Tselem has received funding from the Netherlands Representative Office in Ramallah, as well as a Swedish church organization called Diakonia, funded by Sweden, the Netherlands, France, Switzerland, and the EU, earmarked specifically to examine Israeli Supreme Court rulings.

 

Diakonia earmarked funds 176,000 Euros in 2018 and NIS 87,12 in 2019 for “examining rulings by the courts” about Palestinian human rights and house demolitions, respectively.

 

Dutch funding went to a “report on the role of the Israeli Supreme Court,” one of several by B’Tselem in recent years, and its documents note that “B’Tselem regularly refers to the Supreme Court as one of the main mechanisms that permits the ongoing occupation and human rights violations by granting judicial legitimacy to Israel’s policies.”

 

The Netherlands has also funded Yesh Din to the tune of 160,930 Euros in 2018. Yesh Din alleges that Israeli courts are unable to investigate allegations of wrongdoing by the Israeli military or government and pushes for war crimes investigations against Israeli officials by the ICC.

 

This is of particular relevance for the ICC investigation, because one of the arguments Jerusalem has made against the Hague court’s authority to probe Israel is that it has a legitimate, independent judiciary and the ICC is meant to prosecute governments in countries where that is not the case. The ICC plans to examine that assertion.

 

Another Palestinian organization deeply involved in fighting against Israel in international legal bodies is Al-Haq, funded by the EU, France, Ireland, Italy, Norway and Spain.

 

Al-Haq Director Shawan Jabarin was convicted for recruiting and training for the PFLP in 1985, and as recently as 2009, the Israeli Supreme Court found that he is still involved in their activities.

 

The organization, together with the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, met with the Prosecutor of the ICC in 2013 to accuse Israel of “widespread and systematic commission of international crimes and violations of international law,” and has continued communications with that office in the subsequent years, repeatedly accusing Israel of war crimes in the West Bank, Jerusalem and Gaza.

 

Meanwhile, some Israeli NGOs said they made attempts to present Israel’s case before the ICC, but were ignored.
The organization “My Truth,” representing IDF reservists, posted on its Facebook page on Sunday that it sent the ICC a complaint with extensive documentation of the “horrors perpetuated by terrorist organizations for many years and the war crimes and their use of civilians as human shields,” but never received a response.

 

International Jewish Lawyers Association President Meir Linzen told Channel 13 this week that the ICC’s Chief Prosecutor refused a meeting with him, in which he intended to “expose the war crimes committed by the Palestinians.”

honest reporting-logo https://honestreporting.com

The International Criminal Court and the Palestinians

By 26December2019 https://honestreporting.com/international-criminal-court-palestinians/

The announcement by the International Criminal Court (ICC) that it will open an investigation into Palestinian allegations — including that West Bank settlements are war crimes — casts more doubt on the ability of the court to operate as it was intended.

The ICC’s founders established the court “to investigate, prosecute and try individuals accused of committing the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole, namely the crime of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes.”

Failure on Four Counts

Repeated Palestinian attempts to use the ICC as part of their lawfare against Israel have been documented over the years, but this most recent attempt fails on four basic counts.

1. By its own definition, “the ICC is intended to complement, not to replace, national criminal systems; it prosecutes cases only when States do not are unwilling or unable to do so genuinely.” Israel is a democratic state with judicial oversight with well-developed and competent civilian and military justice systems as in any other modern country. Israel has been and remains both willing and able to investigate and prosecute cases and has done so.

“The ICC’s mandate is not to replace national courts – it only intervenes when national governments and leaders refuse or are unable to prosecute war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity.”

Prof. William Gumede, School of Governance, Univ. of Witwatersrand

2. The courts in Israel have addressed, or are still dealing with, all the legal issues in the Palestinian allegations including the 2014 Gaza war, the weekly Gaza-border riots organized by Hamas and ongoing settlement-related issues. There is a thoroughly documented history of Israel’s justice systems, both civilian and military, investigating and prosecuting the incidents and the ICC is not supposed to duplicate this. Dr. Clare Frances Moran, who is both a university lecturer on law and an assistant council at the ICC, notes the court “was intended to complement, not replace, national criminal systems, prosecuting only when states are unwilling or unable to do so.”

3. In 1993 when they signed the Oslo Accords, the Palestinians agreed that negotiations on legal issues would be conducted directly with Israel and not through third parties. The ICC should be directing the Palestinians to conduct themselves as stated in the signed accords.

4. Numerous expert opinions by legal analysts have concluded that the Palestinians do not meet the criteria for petitioning the ICC, of which Israel (like the United States and Russia) is not a member. There is still no recognized “state of Palestine.” While many sympathetic countries have “recognized” it as such, the Palestinians are only observers at the United Nations and have not fulfilled the international legal requirements to become an independent member of the world body. That the prosecutor at the ICC refers to the “State of Palestine” does not make it such.

Doubts on the International Criminal Court’s Credibility

The International Criminal Court, or ICC, is far from being universally recognized as a respected arbiter of record of “the most serious crimes of concern to the international community.” Since its establishment in 2002, the ICC has become different things to different people based more on what appears to be vested interest than on the rule of law.

A major blow to the credibility of the ICC came earlier in 2019 with intense criticism not from Israel, but by the very people who were tasked with running it. Four former presidents of the Assembly of States Parties, the governing council of the ICC, issued a scathing letter in April, 2019 slamming the ICC’s poor performance and saying they were “disappointed… frustrated . . . and exasperated” by the deficiencies at the court.

“The powerful impact of the Court’s central message is too often not matched by its performance as a judicial institution. We are disappointed by the quality of some of its judicial proceedings, frustrated by some of the results, and exasperated by the management deficiencies that prevent the Court from living up to its full potential.”

Statement by four former presidents of the ICC’s Assembly of States Parties

The four, all veteran diplomats, criticized the ICC for failing to address war crimes in conflict areas like Syria and Yemen. Despite war crimes carried out in those countries documented and exposed in the press, and despite more than half a million innocent Syrian and Yemeni civilians killed, those two humanitarian crisis areas don’t even appear on the ICC website list of situations the court is investigating.

 

Palestinian Lawfare

However, just like at the United Nations in New York and at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, the Palestinians have managed to get themselves a permanent listing on the ICC agenda. Like in other cases, the Palestinian petitions to the ICC appear to be weaponizing the international court as another tool against Israel.

“Palestinian attempts to draw the ICC into core political aspects of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have brought into a sharp focus precisely the risk that the Court might be exploited for illegitimate political gain.”

Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs legal assessment of the ICC

Commenting in the blog of the European Journal of International Law, Prof. Douglas Guilfoyle harshly criticizes the “self-inflicted misfortune” of the ICC, in a meticulously detailed analysis that argues that the court in reality “is an intergovernmental organisation of limited competence in, unfortunately, every sense.”

“The Rome Statute promised us a Court of last resort that would defer to genuine State prosecutions, not a Court of first resort which micromanages the conduct of national investigations and prosecutions,” said Guilfoyle.

The ICC by definition has jurisdiction only over signatory states. Yet the ICC Chief Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda referred to the Palestinians as the “State of Palestine” despite that there is no independent state of “Palestine.” The UN classifies the Palestinians as having “non-Member Observer State status.” Like the UN, the ICC started out as a great concept on paper, but in practice its efficacy and relevance to its founding goals is leaving a lot to be desired. With its headquarters in The Hague, even the country that hosts the ICC, Holland, is demanding that the court reform itself and do better.

Israel responded to the ICC in part with an in-depth legal assessment of the ICC’s position prepared by the Office of the Attorney General, concluding that given the mandate of the ICC and the fact that there is no state of Palestine, “the ICC manifestly lacks jurisdiction over the “situation in Palestine.”

Instead of constructively facilitating Mideast peace, the International Criminal Court stains itself, unfairly smears Israel’s justice system and emboldens the Palestinians to avoid peace talks.

 



The ICC trashed the very notion that it has credibility when it went after the only democracy in the Middle East.

A 5-step plan to fight the ICC

The International Criminal Court is not a legal body. It is a political organization that is exceedingly hostile to Israel. To fight it, Israel needs to ditch its failed legal strategy and adopt and implement an aggressive plan to defeat the ICC on its own political terms.

Caroline Glick

Caroline Glick

by  Caroline B. Glick Published on 23December2019 https://www.israelhayom.com/2019/12/23/a-5-step-plan-to-fight-the-icc/

International Criminal Court

International Criminal Court – THE HAGUE, NETHERLANDS

 

Last year, then MK Tzipi Livni convened senior officials from the Justice Ministry and Military Advocate General’s international affairs departments at the Knesset for a conference. The purpose of the conclave was to provide the officials with the opportunity to justify their interference with security decisions that by law are the exclusive purview of the IDF’s field commanders and Israel’s elected leaders.

As is their wont, the officials used the opportunity to proclaim, “the legal system is the IDF’s legal Iron Dome against accusations of war crimes in foreign and international forums.”

 

Following International Criminal Court Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda’s decision over the weekend to prosecute Israel – including its armed forces and elected leaders – on phony war crimes allegations, we see that their conceit was a lie. The idea that Israel’s legal fraternity is Israel’s protection against the likes of Bensouda and the lawfare gang she runs with was first concocted in the 1990s by then Chief Justice Aharon Barak. The purpose of this fantasy was and remains to justify interference by the various components of the legal fraternity – the High Court, the Justice Ministry, the Attorney General and the Military Advocate General and others – in the decisions of IDF commanders and elected officials.

As Prof. Avi Bell of Bar Ilan University Law School explained in Israel Hayom earlier this week, Bensouda’s decision exposed the colossal failure of the legal fraternity’s strategy for protecting the country from the lawfare gang. Bensouda’s decision is a horrible, strategic blow for Israel. It endangers the very lives of IDF soldiers, commanders and elected officials.

Members of the legal fraternity asserted their competence to direct Israel’s responses by presenting the ICC as a legal body. But as the Rome Statute of 1998, which founded the ICC made clear, the institution’s political nature was evident from the outset, as was its inherent hostility to Israel. Now that Bensouda’s biased ruling has exposed this state of affairs, Israel must replace the lawyers’ failed legal strategy with a political one.

 

A political strategy for fighting the political ICC has five components:

 

The first component of the political strategy is institutional. Responsibility for handling the ICC has to be transferred from the lawyers who facilitated Bensouda’s hostile decision to the people who have to clean up the mess they made – the Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister. To this end, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu needs to order all legal officials – from Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit to the Justice Ministry’s International Affairs Office to the Foreign Ministry’s Legal Advisor to the Military Advocate General’s International Law Department to cease and desist from all actions on the matter. These legal officials should be barred from making any statements to anyone about the ICC and prohibited from all communications with the ICC or regarding the ICC.

 

These government officials are charged with dealing with international legal matters. And Bensouda’s decision to prosecute Israel for imaginary war crimes proves beyond all doubt that the ICC is not engaged in anything resembling international law.

 

The second step is legislative. Whereas Israelis – the ICC’s #1 target – deluded themselves into believing that the ICC was a legal challenge best dealt with by lawyers, the Americans – its #2 target – were under no such delusions. To deal with this threat, in 2002 Congress passed the American Service Members’ Protection Act.

 

The goal of the ASPA, popularly dubbed “the Hague Invasion Act” is “to protect United States military personnel and other elected and appointed officials of the United States government against criminal prosecution by an international criminal court to which the United States is not party.”

 

The law authorizes the president to use “all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any US or allied personnel being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court.”

 

The ASPA bars all US government bodies from assisting the ICC in any way and prohibits the transfer of US military assistance to countries that are party to the court.

 

The Knesset needs to follow Congress’ example. The Knesset should convene from recess in emergency session to pass an identical law. Indeed, it is outrageous that no such law has passed to date.

 

The third part of the political strategy for fighting the ICC is diplomatic. Here too, it involves following the US’s example. Led by then Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security John Bolton, between 2002 and 2005, the United States negotiated agreements with dozens of countries to prohibit them from turning Americans over to the ICC.

 

The Foreign Ministry must engage every country Israel has diplomatic relations with, and particularly those that receive aid from Israel, including African states, and ask them to sign similar agreements. Israel should strongly consider conditioning the provision of further aid on the conclusion of such agreements.

 

Step four of the political strategy for fighting political war against the political ICC pertains to public relations. For the duration of the ICC’s existence, every Israeli representative everywhere in the world should be directed to attack the ICC at every opportunity. The purpose of the attacks is to delegitimize the ICC’s very existence and work towards its enfeeblement, delegitimization and dismantlement.

 

It ought to go without saying that Israel needs to cut off all official and unofficial contact with the ICC. All of its officials – indeed anyone even remotely associated with the ICC – must be banned from entering Israel. And any ICC officials presently on territory under Israeli control must be immediately expelled.

 

The final step Israel must take to beat back the ICC relates to its policies regarding Judea and Samaria. For the past several years, Mendelblit and his comrades have used the ICC inquiry to prevent the government from implementing its policies in the areas. For instance, according to multiple government sources, the reason Netanyahu has failed to evacuate Khan al-Ahmar, despite a Supreme Court ruling requiring the illegal Beduin encampment that threatens the access road to Kfar Adumim to be dismantled, and the reason Netanyahu set aside his plan to apply Israeli law to the Jordan Valley and Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria is because Mendelblit and his fellow lawyers argued that implementing those policies would increase the likelihood that Bensouda would prosecute Israel.

 

If this is what happened, then it is now clear that Mendelblit and his associates misled Netanyahu. Bensouda didn’t need an excuse to prosecute Israel for nothing. So Israel should ignore her and act in its own interests. Netanyahu and Defense Minister Naftali Bennett need to order Khan al-Ahmar’s immediate evacuation. And within a week the government should pass a decision to apply Israeli law to all Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria and the Jordan Valley.

 

Israel’s legal system is responsible for defending Israel in foreign courts and international legal bodies. It is incompetent to defend the country from political onslaughts by hostile political bodies. The ICC’s anti-Semitic decision, which seeks to criminalize Zionism and the State of Israel demonstrates that it is a hostile political institution.

 

Israel’s political leaders made a grave mistake in heeding the counsel of our power-hungry jurists. Now that we know the truth, they must clear the decks and let political warriors fight the political war the ICC is waging against the country and its citizens.

JerusalemCats Comments: Israel needs to do what the rest of the World does: Put the fear of God into the Judges. Since this is Lawfare, act like Warfare and “Start Targeted Killing” of the ICC members and employees. If Israel can use it on Hamas why not the other “Terrorist of the ICC”?

Australia Slams ICC Over Probe Against Israel

Posted by 26December2019 https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/12/australia-slams-icc-over-probe-against-israel/

“Australia is concerned by the ICC prosecutor’s proposal to consider the situation in the Palestinian Territories, subject to a ruling by the court’s pre-trial chamber on the scope of the court’s territorial jurisdiction in the matter.”

Australia has blasted the International Criminal Court (ICC) for launching an investigation against Israel.

Australia has blasted the International Criminal Court (ICC) for launching an investigation against Israel.

Rejecting the decision by the Hague-based tribunal to target the Jewish State over alleged ‘war crimes,’ Australia’s Foreign Ministry questioned the legitimacy of the ICC probe against Israel. “Australia’s position is clear — we do not recognize a so-called ‘State of Palestine’ and we do not recognize that there is such a State Party to the ICC’s Rome Statute,”said the ministry’s spokesperson.

The Times of Israel news website reported the official Australian response:

“Australia is concerned by the ICC prosecutor’s proposal to consider the situation in the Palestinian Territories, subject to a ruling by the court’s pre-trial chamber on the scope of the court’s territorial jurisdiction in the matter,” a spokesperson for Canberra’s Foreign Ministry told Australian-Jewish news site, J-Wire on Tuesday.

“Australia’s position is clear — we do not recognize a so-called ‘State of Palestine’ and we do not recognize that there is such a State Party to the ICC’s Rome Statute,” the spokesperson went on.

Israel’s Foreign Minister Israel Katz praised Australia for the statement and called on other governments to follow suit.

“Many thanks to the Australian government for taking the unequivocal and principled stance against the ICC prosecutor’s decision,” he wrote on his Twitter account. “I urge other countries to take a similar stance and not allow the court to turn into a political weapon against Israel.”

Without specifying the nature of alleged crimes, the ICC chief prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, announced the tribunal’s decision to investigate Israel. She was “satisfied” that “war crimes have been or are being committed in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip.” Bensouda declared in a statement on Friday.

Palestinian terrorist groups, Hamas and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), welcomed the investigation and the ICC for targeting Israel.

The PLO-controlled Palestinian Authority signed the Rome Statute four year ago, a treaty which legitimizes authority of the ICC. International and Palestinian activist groups, many of them linked to terrorist groups and funded by the EU and European countries, had been lobbying the ICC to implicate Israel in supposed ‘war crimes.’ The United States and Israel have not signed the treaty and thus do not fall under the jurisdiction of the court.

The U.S. was among the first countries to back Israel over the issue. “We firmly oppose this and any other action that seeks to target Israel unfairly,” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said.

Germany, though muted in its response, warned against the “politicization” of the ICC probe. “Basically, it applies to us that we naturally resist the fact that cases of any kind are used to politicize before the court. We are betting that admissibility will be checked and that the court will do it on the basis of the Rome Statute,” a spokesperson for Germany’s Foreign Ministry said.

The Australian statement concurs with the criticism of the probe made by the Israeli government. The ICC “has no authority to adjudicate the matter. It has jurisdiction only in lawsuits presented by sovereign states, but there has never been a Palestinian state,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in response to the ICC’s announcement.

Israeli Defense Minister Naftali Bennett blasted the ICC on Wednesday, calling it a “breeding ground for Antisemitism.” Israel’s Representative to the UN Danny Danon called the campaign led Palestinian agitators at the ICC an act “diplomatic terrorism.”

According to the research done by the watchdog group NGO Monitor, the ICC probe is a result of a concerted effort by groups linked to Palestinian terrorist groups. Israeli news channel i24News reported the findings of the Jerusalem-based watchdog group:

The ICC decision to pursue a probe into alleged war crimes in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip largely resulted from a prolonged and persistent lobbying campaign by terror-lined NGOs, NGO Monitor said on Tuesday.

According to the think tank’s report, a string of non-governmental organisations for years received EU funds for their activities in regards to the International Criminal Court.

Among their ranks are Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, as well as multiple organisations linked with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, which is designated by the US and the EU as a terrorist group, as well as the Boycott, Divest and Sanctions campaign.

Besides these NGOs, including Addameer, Al-Dameer and the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, an Israeli NGO B’Tselem, founded in 1989 to “end Israel’s occupation”, is said to have been part of the lobbying campaign.

In recent years, Palestinian and left-wing groups have increasingly turned to lawfare, a legal campaign warfare to harm and delegitimize Israel. The ICC and its chief prosecutor Fatou Bensouda have a history for employing lawfare tactics against the United States. In April, State Department revoked her visa due to her attempts to investigate U.S. troops in Afghanistan over alleged ‘war crimes.’ The U.S. announced its intentions of slapping sanctions on the ICC if the tribunal targeted the U.S. or its allies, including Israel.

One of Israel’s leading legal authorities, Professor Avi Bell of the Bar Ilan University, urged Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government to follow the U.S. example in combating the lawfare waged by some at the ICC. Writing in the Israel Hayom newspaper, he said:

As long as Israel continues to treat the ICC as a legal entity, and as long as it maintains relations with ICC staff under the assumption that their intentions are good, as long as Israel continues to make legal arguments as if anyone in the ICC is listening, it will continue to lose the battle. We must wake up and take more stringent political steps, like the US already has, before the nightmare of indictments against IDF soldiers becomes a reality.

Also writing for the Israel Hayom, the prominent Israeli columnist Caroline Glick noted: “The International Criminal Court is not a legal body. It is a political organization that is exceedingly hostile to Israel. To fight it, Israel needs to ditch its failed legal strategy and adopt and implement an aggressive plan to defeat the ICC on its own political terms.”

Instead of countering ICC’s probe just by legal means, Glick urged the Israeli government to introduce legislation similar to the American Service Members’ Protection Act passed by the U.S. Congress in 2002. This act seeks “to protect United States military personnel and other elected and appointed officials of the United States government against criminal prosecution by an international criminal court to which the United States is not party.”

The law is popularly known as “the Hague Invasion Act.” It authorizes the U.S. President to use “all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any US or allied personnel being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court,” Glick wrote, quoting the congressional act.

The NGO Monitor‘s research shows how terror-linked NGOs, funded by the EU and European governments, are deploying lawfare to tie Israel’s hands in its fight against Palestinian Islamist terror groups. Driven by these activist groups, the ICC has chosen to go after the Jewish State, the only democracy with a free and impartial judiciary in the Middle East. Since the Hague-based tribunal cannot indict the State of Israel, given its judicial limitations, it will most likely go after Israeli military personnel involved in combating terrorism. In the face of this cowardly two-pronged attack, Israel has every right to use all means available to protect these dedicated and courageous men and women in uniform.

PM Netanyahu: ICC has “no jurisdiction” to probe against Israel.

Statement by PM Netanyahu

Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon orders that any EU request relating to Judea, Samaria and Gaza be turned down because of its latest ban.

Boycotting the Boycotters: Israel fights back against European blacklist campaign

by Breitbart Jerusalem 19 November 2015 http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2015/11/19/boycotting-boycotters-israel-fights-back-european-blacklist-campaign/

JERUSALEM – Israel has decided that it will not stand idly by ​in the face of the European Union’s decision to label all goods produced in the West Bank, Gaza Strip, eastern Jerusalem​ ​and the Golan Heights.

It will take measures against 16 European countries that backed the initiative, likely damaging relations between Israel and the EU, Israeli website Ynet reported.

Some of the 16 countries backing the labeling, including Italy and the Netherlands, have better relations with Israel than others​​, so measures against these countries will be less harsh than countries that have been more hostile towards Israel such as Ireland and Sweden.

Steps include reexamining the EU’s role in the peace process and restricting meetings between EU ambassadors to lower tier government figures. Ambassadors from all 16 countries will receive official censure ​from Israel’s Foreign Ministry.

“In addition, any foreign delegations ​seeking  to visit the West Bank and Gaza will undergo a much stricter process for entry and may even be ​prevented  from entering those areas entirely​. Official representatives from said governments may be denied meetings with the prime minister or the president.

“From now on we will be very measured in how we behave with these visitors,” a senior Israeli official said. “We will control the flow of ​[​passage​]​ and will not authorize things automatically.”

Ynet further reported that​Israel ​will be more stringent ​regarding  which EU projects it allows in ​the ​West Bank and Gaza Strip, thereby diminishing the EU​’s ​influence in those areas.

“They lead many projects which need our support, but you can’t act against us and then expect that everything will continue as normal,” said the official. Finally, dialogue between the EU and Israel – especially on crucial topics ​like strategy, fighting terrorism​,​ and handling immigration – will be reduced, postponed​,​ or halted.

“Whoever takes hostile measures against us will pay the price,” said the source. He was quick to add, however, that no measures will be taken if they harm Israel’s own interests. “We had to walk a tightrope between things we wanted to do so that they would get the message and not hurting ourselves.”

Meanwhile, EU’s ambassador to Israel, Lars Faaborg-Andersen​,​ persisted on Wednesday with his claim that the decision to label Israeli products does not mean Europe is boycotting Israel or the settlements.

“I’ve been shocked to hear claims of anti-Semitism and historical comparisons or analogies to the persecution of Jews in Germany in the​’​30s and​’​ 40s,” Faaborg-Andersen said at the Jerusalem Post’s Diplomatic Conference in Jerusalem. “In my mind this is a distortion of history and belittlement of the crimes of the Nazis, and the memory of their victims.”

“The European Union has been accused of a variety of sins, including today from this podium,” Faaborg-Andersen lamented. “Anti-Semitism, hypocrisy, immorality, rewarding terrorism, destroying Palestinian jobs. These allegations have been made by people coming from the highest echelons in this country.”

Faaborg-Andersen also accused Israel of hypocrisy. “How is the stated commitment to a two-state solution compatible with continued building in settlements, including in many settlements beyond the separation barrier that would not be part of Israel in any peace agreement?

“True, settlements are certainly not the only problem [​in regard to peace] – but they are definitely a significant and crucial problem.”

Earlier in the week​,​ Breibart Jerusalem reported on Faaborg-Andersen’s contradictory explanation ​for the labeling.

On the one hand he insisted Israel was not being singled out and the practice was part of a “uniformed standard” that applied to products from all over the world​,​ but when he was presented with the fact that other disputed regions – of which there are over 200 globally – were not subject to the same labeling Faaborg-Andersen rationalized that those situations were different from Israel’s.

Why do we care about Amnesty International’s bias? What is the impact of this organization?

David Collier: We cannot overstate the impact of NGOs like Amnesty. They are the bridge between actions on the ground and International forums such as the UN, UNHRC and even the ICC. The NGOs are seen as legitimate and impartial “judges” and their findings carry real weight. None more so than Amnesty. If Amnesty is simply pushing raw anti-Israel propaganda as evidence during a UN hearing, they legitimise the UN’s own bias against Israel. In effect Amnesty acts as the glue which reinforces a global anti-Israel bias – if they played fair, things would look very different.

Terror-linked and boycott promoting NGOs behind potential ICC investigation

December 24, 2019 https://www.ngo-monitor.org/reports/terror-linked-and-boycott-promoting-ngos-behind-potential-icc-investigation/

Catch The Jew! by Tuvia Tenenbom - https://www.amazon.com/Catch-Jew-Tuvia-Tenenbom/dp/9652297984/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_14_t_0?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=4YVE1XVDE61ENZH4NDW7This has been going on for years. Just Read:

Catch The Jew! by Tuvia Tenenbom

https://www.amazon.com/Catch-Jew-Tuvia-Tenenbom/dp/9652297984/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_14_t_0?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=4YVE1XVDE61ENZH4NDW7

You also have Amnesty International. David Collier has written a  report commissioned by Jewish Human Rights Watch a UK-based NGO. They fight anti-Israel bias the clever way, either by challenging it in the courts or exposing the toxic nature of those that stand against us.exposing the anti-Israel bias and obsession of international human rights group.

Click to download Click to download PDF file Spotlight on Amnesty-International – From Bias to Obsession

 

On December 20, 2019, Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) Fatou Bensouda announced that she intends to investigate alleged war crimes in the “State of Palestine.”  This move is to a significant degree the product of consistent and heavy lobbying of the ICC for over a decade by non-governmental organizations (NGOs). These include Human Rights Watch (HRW), Amnesty International, and a number of groups with ties to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) terror group, and funded by Europe.

In some instances, the European funding to Palestinian NGOs was explicitly earmarked for their activities vis-à-vis the ICC. For instance, during the 2014 Gaza conflict, the Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Secretariat – a joint funding mechanisms of the governments of Switzerland, Sweden, the Netherlands, and Denmark – distributed “emergency funding” to Palestinian NGOs to document “large scale violations of human rights and international humanitarian law – the majority against Palestinian civilians and civilian objects.”

These organizations are not credible sources of information for the court.  Their ties to the PFLP terror group, as well as their promotion of BDS and other anti-Israel activities, should be disqualifying for any independent and objective body.

Addameer

Al-Dameer

The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR)

Terror-linked and boycott promoting NGOs behind potential ICC investigation December 24, 2019 On December 20, 2019, Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) Fatou Bensouda announced that she intends to investigate alleged war crimes in the “State of Palestine.” This move is to a significant degree the product of consistent and heavy lobbying of the ICC for over a decade by non-governmental organizations (NGOs). These include Human Rights Watch (HRW), Amnesty International, and a number of groups with ties to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) terror group, and funded by Europe. In some instances, the European funding to Palestinian NGOs was explicitly earmarked for their activities vis-à-vis the ICC. For instance, during the 2014 Gaza conflict, the Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Secretariat – a joint funding mechanisms of the governments of Switzerland, Sweden, the Netherlands, and Denmark – distributed “emergency funding” to Palestinian NGOs to document “large scale violations of human rights and international humanitarian law – the majority against Palestinian civilians and civilian objects.” These organizations are not credible sources of information for the court. Their ties to the PFLP terror group, as well as their promotion of BDS and other anti-Israel activities, should be disqualifying for any independent and objective body. Addameer Addameer received 120,000 CHF from the Swiss government in 2018. According to the Swiss government contract, Addameer is expected to “follow up for the submission to the ICC, and to file a new report” (emphasis added). According to media reports, Khalida Jarrar – listed by Addameer as the vice chair of its board of directors until 2017 –reportedly played a leading role in the PA’s ascendency to the ICC. Jarrar has served several stints in Israeli prison for her role in the PFLP, including her conviction for calling to kidnap Israeli soldiers. She was re-arrested on October 31, 2019 on suspicions of “involvement in terror activity.” On December 18, 2019, the Israel Security Agency (Shabak) revealed that Jarrar has “emerged as the head of the PFLP in the West Bank“and [is]responsible for all the organization’s activities.” Concurrently, she served as a leading member of Addameer’s board of directors, through 2017. (emphasis added). According to Fatah, Addameer is an affiliate of the PFLP. Several of Addameer’s current and former employees, as well as lawyers that work for Addameer, are linked to the terror group. Addameer listed Samer Arbid as its accountant for several years on its website. According to Israeli security officials, on August 23, 2019, he commanded a PFLP terror cell that carried out a bombing against Israeli civilians, murdering 17-year old Rina Shnerb, and injuring her father and brother. According to the indictment, Arbid prepared and detonated the explosive device. According to Arabic-language media, and other sources, Arbid worked as the accountant of the PFLP-affiliated NGO Union of Agricultural Work Committees (UAWC)1 at the time of his September 2019 arrest.2 Al-Dameer The organization received a 450,000 Euro grant from the EU for 2016-2019, and a 9 million CHF grant from the Swiss government for 2018-2019. In the Swiss government contract, Al-Dameer is required to “provide information and reports to the International Criminal Court on human rights violations committed by the IOF [Israeli Occupation Forces]” (emphasis added) (On file with NGO Monitor). Al-Dameer has organizational ties to the PFLP, as seen in their joint November 2018 workshop, addressing prisoners’ issues. Additionally, according to Palestinian sources, in recent years, Al-Dameer officials, employees and board members have taken part in public PFLP gatherings, including congratulating the terror group on the anniversary of its founding, and participating in a PFLP delegation in Gaza. Al-Dameer advances BDS (boycotts, divestment and sanctions) in different forums and participated in campaigns targeting international firms such as G4S, and Veolia. The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR) PCHR received a 280,000 CHF grant from the Swiss government in 2018, a 340,000 Euro grant from the German government in 2017, and a 80,000 Euro grant from the Irish government in 2017. In the Swiss government contract, PCHR is required to “Conduct[ing] communications with the Office of the General Prosecutor of the ICC and other intn’l litigation mechanisms.” (emphasis added) (On file with NGO Monitor) According to the Washington Post, PCHR Director Raji Sourani served a three-year prison sentence from 1979-1982 due to his role in the PFLP. He has participated in public PFLP events, including in 2017. In 2014, the terror organization even held an evening in his honor, where members of the PFLP politburo presented him with an award. According to a December 27, 1985 Israeli media report, the deputy director of PCHR’s board, Jaber Wishah, served as “the head of the military wing of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine in Gaza.” He was sentenced to life in prison and spent 15 years in Israeli prison from 1985-1999, after being convicted of “holding a leading position in a terrorist organization of which he was a member, intentionally attempting to kill an Israeli Staff Sergeant in Gaza, configuring a bomb and planting a bomb, possession of fire arms and conspiring to commit murder.” In February 2017, as a member of the Palestinian Human Rights Organizations Council (PHROC), released a statement calling upon “the international community to abide by their international obligations” and “act immediately by imposing sanctions against Israel.” In July 2016, lobbied the British government to arrest former Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni for alleged war crimes committed during the 2009 Gaza conflict. Raji Sourani accepts award from the PFLP on February 16, 2014. From right to left: PCHR General Director Raji Sourani, PFLP Central Committee member Rabah Muhanna, and PFLP Central Committee member Mariam Abu Daqah (Source: Al Watan Voice, “The people honor the fighter Professor Raji Sourani in recognition of his role in transmitting the message of our people,” February 17, 2014: https://video.alwatanvoice.com/view/2014/02/17/496986.html Another photo of Sourani received the award. The banner reads “Recognizing the distinguished professor, Raji Sourani on receiving the Alternative Nobel Prize, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.” (Source: PCHR, “PFLP honors Lawyer Raji Sourani for Winning ‘Alternative Noble Prize,’” February 20, 2014: https://pchrgaza.org/en/?p=858) Al-Haq Received EUR 300,000 from the EU for 2017-2020, EUR 1.19 million from Italy for 2018-2020, and NOK 2 million from Norway in 2018. Al-Haq General Director Shawan Jabarin is tied to the PFLP. As a result, his requests for Israeli exit visas have been denied on several occasions, and he has been denied entry by Jordan. In a series of court cases in 2007-2009, the Israeli High Court of Justice found Jabarin to be a senior PFLP activist (2007, 2008, 2009). Al-Haq is one of the leading Palestinian BDS actors, and has pressured the French government and French companies such as Orange, to cut ties with Israeli banks, companies and projects. Together with Al-Mezan, lobbied British authorities in 2009 to issue an arrest warrant for former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. In 2016, lobbied British authorities to issue and arrest warrant for former Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livini. Al-Mezan Al-Mezan received a 450,000 Euro grant from the EU for 2017-2020, and a 200,000 grant from the Dutch government in 2018. In the Dutch government funding contract, Al-Mezan is expected “to ensure that “information on IHRL [international human rights law] and IHL and violations in the oPt [occupied Palestinian territories] are disseminated locally and internationally.” Like PCHR, as a member of the Palestinian Human Rights Organizations Council (PHROC), released a statement calling upon “the international community to abide by their international obligations” and “act immediately by imposing sanctions against Israel.” In 2016, defined BDS activity as “peacefully pursu[ing] a human rights agenda based on an international law framework.” Held a 2016 event in the European Parliament, promoting the discriminatory UN “blacklist” of companies operating in Israel. Together with Al-Haq, lobbied British authorities in 2009 to issue an arrest warrant for former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. Human Rights Watch Human Rights Watch (HRW) has also been a leading proponent of an ICC investigation targeting Israel. It has promoted this agenda by pushing the PA to ascend to the ICC, lobbying the ICC prosecutor, and publishing reports with spurious arguments alleging Israeli violations of international law. Under the leadership of Executive Director Ken Roth, Middle East head Sarah Leah Whitson, and Israel and Palestine Country Director Omar Shakir, HRW has launched campaigns that seek to harm Israeli banks and soccer clubs, and have targeted platforms promoting tourism. Amnesty International Amnesty has called for ICC investigations into Israel surrounding its conflicts with Gaza in both 2009 and 2014. Amnesty has long worked to advance BDS campaigns, including supporting BDS legislation in the US and in Ireland, as well as calling on governments to impose an arms embargo on Israel. Following the publication of its January 2019 report targeting tourism in Israel and the West Bank, Mayor of Frankfurt Uwe Becker stated, “Amnesty International is promoting ethnic cleansing…[and] walking in the footprints of the antisemitic BDS movement.” Footnotes According to Fatah, UAWC is a PFLP-affiliate. Additionally, a USAID-engaged audit also identifies UAWC as a PFLP-affiliate. According to photos posted on UAWC’s Facebook in March 2019, his attendance at UAWC’s 2018 annual assembly, and an October 3, 2019 Alaraby article.

Raji Sourani accepts award from the PFLP on February 16, 2014. From right to left: PCHR General Director Raji Sourani, PFLP Central Committee member Rabah Muhanna, and PFLP Central Committee member Mariam Abu Daqah
(Source: Al Watan Voice, “The people honor the fighter Professor Raji Sourani in recognition of his role in transmitting the message of our people,” February 17, 2014: https://video.alwatanvoice.com/view/2014/02/17/496986.html

Another photo of Sourani received the award

Another photo of Sourani received the award. The banner reads “Recognizing the distinguished professor, Raji Sourani on receiving the Alternative Nobel Prize, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.”
(Source: PCHR, “PFLP honors Lawyer Raji Sourani for Winning ‘Alternative Noble Prize,’” February 20, 2014: https://pchrgaza.org/en/?p=858)

Al-Haq

Al-Mezan

Human Rights Watch

Human Rights Watch (HRW) has also been a leading proponent of an ICC investigation targeting Israel.  It has promoted this agenda by pushing the PA to ascend to the ICC, lobbying the ICC prosecutor, and publishing reports with spurious arguments alleging Israeli violations of international law.

Under the leadership of Executive Director Ken Roth, Middle East head Sarah Leah Whitson, and Israel and Palestine Country Director Omar Shakir, HRW has launched campaigns that seek to harm Israeli banks and soccer clubs, and have targeted platforms promoting tourism.

Amnesty International

Amnesty has called for ICC investigations into Israel surrounding its conflicts with Gaza in both 2009 and 2014.

Amnesty has long worked to advance BDS campaigns, including supporting BDS legislation in the US and in Ireland, as well as calling on governments to impose an arms embargo on Israel.  Following the publication of its January 2019 report targeting tourism in Israel and the West Bank, Mayor of Frankfurt Uwe Becker stated, “Amnesty International is promoting ethnic cleansing…[and] walking in the footprints of the antisemitic BDS movement.”

Footnotes

  1. According to Fatah, UAWC is a PFLP-affiliate.  Additionally, a USAID-engaged audit also identifies UAWC as a PFLP-affiliate.
  2. According to photos posted on UAWC’s Facebook in March 2019, his attendance at UAWC’s 2018 annual assembly, and an October 3, 2019 Alaraby article.

Technion Nation – Building Israel the Start-Up Nation

אין לי ארץ אחרת / IDF Soldiers

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Share

Post a Comment

Your email is never shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*