Tagarchief: USA

Letter to CAF about their continuing involvement in the illegal Israeli settlements

LETTER TO CAF ABOUT THEIR CONTINUING INVOLVEMENT INTHE ILLEGAL ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS

  • A metro stop
  • CAFCreating rail solutions tailored to suit the needs of each and every customer.Front view of a high-speed train

CAF TRANSPORTSYSTEM, EARNING BLOOD MONEY BY SUPPORTING THEILLEGAL ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS

Image result for settlements/Images

ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS, ILLEGAL UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW

https://www.caf.net/en/compania/index.phphttps://bdsmovement.net/boycott-cafhttps://bdsmovement.net/boycott-caf

ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS, ILLEGAL UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW

TOCAF 
Director and ManagementSubject: Your continuing involvement with the illegal Israeli settlements

Dear Director,Dear Management,

As you’ll probably know:This is not the first time I wrote to you to give you hell about your despicablerole concerning the illegal Israeli settlements:See below, under notes!And since you obviously felt any shame and are still involved in thosecriminal practices of your company, serving Israel’s illegal settlements in occupied Palestinian territory. [1], I’ll target you again and I’m sure that I am NOTthe only one!Must I-again- remind you of the fact, that, as I stated above, the Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian territory [you serve the settlements inoccupied East Jerusalem!] are illegal according International Law? [2]Therefore, by serving those illegal settlements, you are not only complicit in stealing occupied Palestinian land, worse still:You are serving and maintaining the illegal Israeli occupation, thus defending and maintaining a criminal regime of opression and apartheid! [3]And by maintaining a regime of apartheid, you are complicit incrimes against humanity. [4]All the water in the world can’t wash the blood on your hands [5] by doing thus!
ISRAELI TERROR IN EASTERN JERUSALEM’
Of course you are aware of the Israeli terror in Eastern Jerusalem:The house evictions of Palestinians in favour of the illegal settlementsyou facilitate , the storming of the Al Aqsa Mosque  the excessive policeviolence against the Palestinian population [6]Especially neigbourhood Sheikh Jarrah is victim of Israeli etniccleansing operations and The Jerusalem Light Rail, hosted andfacilitated by your company, passes through Sheikh Jarrah, facilitating thug settlers and the Israeli occupation! [7]Have you no shame.Is your money deserving obsession that big, that you are willing to be complicit in warcrimes and crimes against humanity?For make no mistake:The crimes that Israel commits in occupied Gaza [8] are also yourco responsibility, since you facilitate the Israeli occupationregime!
CONCLUSION
I have said and written enoughAnd what says more:I’ve written the things you already knew, but ignored.So Directors and Management of CAF, again:You are complicit in warcrimes and crimes against humanity,as long as you facilitate the illegal settlements and the Israelioccupation regime of apartheid!So STOP IT!
Withdraw your interests in the occupied territories as quick as the Light!Stop your criminal Work
AND:I call on your shareholders [see cc] to stop you and pressure you todo the only right thing:
To wash the blood of your hands and don’t support the Dark Powers that Be, which is this Regime of Occupation and Apartheid
DIXI [Latin for: I have spoken] [9]
Kind greetings
Astrid EssedAmsterdam 
NOTES
SEE ALSO THE LINK TO THE NOTES
https://www.astridessed.nl/notes-t-1-m-9-at-letter-to-caf-about-involvement-in-the-illegal-israeli-settlements/

OR

https://www.dewereldmorgen.be/community/notes-t-t-m-9-at-letter-to-caf-at-involvement-in-the-illegal-israeli-settlements/

THE PHYSICAL NOTES:

[1]

INTERNATIONAL RAILWAY JOURNAL.COM

CAF AND SHAPIR AWARDED JERUSALEM LIGHTRAIL PROJECT CONTRACT

TEXT

JERUSALEM Transportation Masterplan Team (JTMT) has awarded the TransJerusalem J-Net consortium, comprised of CAF and the construction firm Shapir, a €1.8bn contract to undertake an extension to the Jerusalem light rail network.

The Private-Public Partnership (PPP) includes the construction of 27km of new track, 53 new stations and various depots covering a 6.8km extension to the Red Line, and the new 20.6km Green Line. The Red Line is currently 13.8km long with 23 stations, and carries around 145,000 passengers daily.

The consortium will also design and supply 114 new Urbos LRVs for the Green Line, and the refurbishment of the 46 vehicles currently in service on the Red Line.

The contract includes the signalling, energy and communication systems, as well as the operation and maintenance of both lines for 15 and 25 years respectively, with the possibility of extending the term of operation.

CAF’s share of the contract is worth more than €500m, and includes the vehicle’s supply and refurbishment, signalling, energy and communication systems and project integration. CAF will also have a 50% stake in the Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) company that will manage the operation and maintenance of both lines, which is expected to have a €1bn turnover.

Construction is expected begin later this year with the new extensions fully operational by 2025.

Shikun & Binui and Egged (Israel), CRRC (China), Comsa (Spain), Efatec (Portugal) and MPK (Poland) also submitted bids for the contract.

END OF THE ARTICLE

]URBAN TRANSPORT MAGAZINECAF-SAPHIR CONSORTIUM WINS JERUSALEM GREEN LINELIGHT RAIL TENDER

8 AUGUST 2019

The transport authority JTMT (Jerusalem Transportation Masterplan Team) has chosen the TransJerusalem J-Net Ltd consortium, consisting in the CAF Group and the construction firm Saphir, for the Jerusalem light rail project. The project value is 1.8 billion EUR.

The so-called Green line is a PPP (Private-Public Partnership) scheme and includes the construction of 20.6 kilometres of new track, 53 stations and a depot. Jerusalem opened its’ first light rail line, the red line in 2011. The new Green line uses the current Red Line on a stretch of 6.8 km. The contract also includes the design and supply of 114 low-floor Urbos trams (which will be operated as double-tractions) for the new Green Line and the refurbishment of the 46 units which are currently in service on the existing Red Line.

114 Urbos trams and 25 years of operation

The project scope of the consortium will also include the supply of the signalling, energy and communication systems, as well as the operation and maintenance of both lines for 15 and 25 years respectively, with the possibility of extending the term of operation. The CAF Group’s scope of this project exceeds 500 million EUR. The Group will also have a 50% stake in the company that will manage the operation and maintenance of both lines. The project is expected to be implemented this year with the new network fully operative by 2025.

The future network

The tram’s Red Line currently extends along 13.8 km with 23 stations distributed on the route, was inaugurated in 2011 and providing transport to over 145,000 passengers on average per day. The Green lines is expected to have a ridership of 200,000 passengers per day. It will link the two campuses of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and continue south via Pat junction to Gilo while using a common section with the Red line in the city centre until the terminus of the Tel Aviv – Jerusalem railway station which was inaugurated in 2018.

Of the eight entities that participated in the preliminary stages, only two consortiums submitted bids in the final stage. The other consortium consisted in the companies Shikun & Binui and Egged (Israel), CRRC (China), Comsa (Spain), Efatec (Portugal) and MPK (Poland). Siemens, Alstom and Bombardier are reported to have left the tender process at an earlier stage. The companies did not officially withdraw from the process due to political reasons. Nevertheless, the light rail development in Jerusalem has been criticized in the past as both lines run through the disputed area of East Jerusalem.

END OF THE ARTICLE

CAF

GET OFF ISRAEL APARTHEIDTRAIN

https://bdsmovement.net/boycott-caf

WHY?

Israel is only able to maintain its regime of occupation, colonisation and apartheid over the Palestinian people because of international complicity. Corporations play a key role in this.

The Jerusalem Light Rail (JLR) project is so blatantly illegal that other multinationals which had participated in the initial stages of bidding for the project, including Alstom, Siemens, Systra, Bombardier and Macquarie withdrew from the call for tenders, leaving just two consortiums bidding.

The French company Veolia was forced to pull out of the same illegal Israeli JLR project in 2015 after losing billions of dollars in international tenders due to sustained BDS campaigning in Europe, the US and several Arab countries.

The Israeli business publication Globes claimed, expectedly, that the other firms did not “officially withdraw from the process for political reasons” but admitted that “for most of the international transportation and infrastructure companies, Jerusalem is ‘outside the pale.’

By carrying out this project, CAF is also violating its own code of conduct, where it says that “any action by CAF and its members will keep scrupulous respect for laws, human rights and public liberties.” The Basque Autonomous Community government owns shares of CAF, which should ensure that no public money supports Israel’s illegal occupation of the occupied Palestinian territory.

Corporate involvement in the crimes of Israel’s regime of occupation and apartheid is not only morally reprehensible and a legal liability. It can hurt business, too.

MILESTONES

2020

October:

In the Spanish state over 100 people have asked the public train company RENFE not to contract CAF, due to its involvement in the illegal Israeli Jerusalem Light Rail (JLR), in partnership with the Israeli company Shapir that is in the UN database of companies that enable and profit from Israel’s illegal settlement enterprise. 

Eighteen human rights groups have asked the Spanish Minister of transport José Luis Abalos to exclude from public tenders CAF and all companies listed in the UN database, such as Alstom. Over thirty organisations in solidarity with Palestine sent a letter to Reyes Maroto the Spanish  Minister of Industry and the publicly owned company RENFE. This letter was sent because the Minister had offered more public contracts to CAF in light of the company’s announcement of its plans to shut down one of its factories, Trenasa, causing 118 people to lose their jobs. This decision is incomprehensible seeing that the company ended 2019 with its highest record of earnings and its best record in sales. This and the fact that CAF is involved in an illegal Israeli project that serves settlements, which will expose the company to boycott campaigns globally, are clear evidence that CAF cares very little about its workers’ rights and about human rights in general. 

In Oslo, Norway,  the Palestine Committee and two railway unions received new trams from the Basque firm CAF with a protest. They’re asking Norway’s public sector not to work with CAF until it stops building Israel’s illegal Jerusalem Light Rail, entrenching apartheid.

Eight trade unions in Norway have joined the call to boycott CAF: Norwegian Union of Municipal and General Employees (National), Norwegian Union of Railway workers (National), National Union of Norwegian Locomotivemen (National),  Fagforbundet- Helse, Sosial og Velferd, Oslo (Local), Norwegian Civil Service Union at OsloMet (Local), Lokomotivpersonalets forening Oslo (Local), Norwegian Federation of Trade Unions, local 850 (Local),  and Oslo Sporveiers Arbeiderforening (Local).

CAF and Shapir are close to signing one of the largest project financing agreements ever agreed in Israel for the construction and operation of a network of lines in the illegal Jerusalem Light Rail project. The financing will be extended by a consortium of banks led by Bank Hapoalim, which like Shapir is included in the UN database of companies profiting from business in Israel’s illegal settlements. 

END OF THE ARTICLE

” The Jerusalem light rail connects large Israeli settlement blocs in occupied East Jerusalem with the western part of the city, expropriating occupied Palestinian land and promoting increased territorial contiguity for settlements alongside growing territorial fragmentation for East Jerusalem’s Palestinian neighborhoods.”

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
WHO PROFITS.ORGFLASH REPORTTRACKING ANNEXATION:THE JERUSALEM LIGHT RAIL AND THE ISRAELIOCCUPATION

JUL 2017

https://whoprofits.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/old/tracking_annexation_-_the_jerusalem_light_rail_and_the_israeli_occupation.pdf

”Development of the light rail line is bringing prosperity and growth to the city’s real estate and business sectors, an upsurge in cultural and entertainment centers, and accessibility to the downtown area for residents of large neighborhoods, such as Pigat Ze’ev.”

CITYPASS

JERUSALEM LIGHTRAIL

ABOUT

JERUSALEM AND THE LIGHT RAIL

https://web.archive.org/web/20130925233415/http://www.citypass.co.il/english/ContentPage.aspx?ID=16

ORIGINELE BRON

CITYPASS

JERUSALEM LIGHTRAIL

https://web.archive.org/web/20130925233325/http://www.citypass.co.il/english/default.aspx

Pisgat Ze’ev (Hebrew: פסגת זאב‎, lit. Ze’ev’s Peak) is an Israeli settlement in East Jerusalem[1] and the largest residential neighborhood in Jerusalem with a population of over 50,000.[2] Pisgat Ze’ev was established by Israel as one of the city’s five Ring Neighborhoods on land effectively annexed after the 1967 Six-Day War.”

WIKIPEDIA

PISGAT ZE’EV

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pisgat_Ze%27ev

[2]

ILLEGALITY OF THE SETTLEMENTS

”Israel’s policy of settling its civilians in occupied Palestinian territory and displacing the local population contravenes fundamental rules of international humanitarian law.

Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention states: “The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.” It also prohibits the “individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory”. 

The extensive appropriation of land and the appropriation and destruction of property required to build and expand settlements also breach other rules of international humanitarian law. Under the Hague Regulations of 1907, the public property of the occupied population (such as lands, forests and agricultural estates) is subject to the laws of usufruct. This means that an occupying state is only allowed a very limited use of this property. This limitation is derived from the notion that occupation is temporary, the core idea of the law of occupation. In the words of the International Committee of the Red Cross, the occupying power “has a duty to ensure the protection, security, and welfare of the people living under occupation and to guarantee that they can live as normal a life as possible, in accordance with their own laws, culture, and traditions.”

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

CHAPTER 3: ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS AND INTERNATIONAL

LAW

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2019/01/chapter-3-israeli-settlements-and-international-law/

ARTICLE 49. 4TH GENEVA CONVENTION

ARTICLE 49 [ Link ]

Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive.
Nevertheless, the Occupying Power may undertake total or partial evacuation of a given area if the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand. Such evacuations may not involve the displacement of protected persons outside the bounds of the occupied territory except when for material reasons it is impossible to avoid such displacement. Persons thus evacuated shall be transferred back to their homes as soon as hostilities in the area in question have ceased.
The Occupying Power undertaking such transfers or evacuations shall ensure, to the greatest practicable extent, that proper accommodation is provided to receive the protected persons, that the removals are effected in satisfactory conditions of hygiene, health, safety and nutrition, and that members of the same family are not separated.
The Protecting Power shall be informed of any transfers and evacuations as soon as they have taken place.
The Occupying Power shall not detain protected persons in an area particularly exposed to the dangers of war unless the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand.
The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies. 

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/1a13044f3bbb5b8ec12563fb0066f226/523ba38706c71588c12563cd0042c407

THE HAGUE CONVENTION

ARTICLE 55

”Art. 55. The occupying State shall be regarded only as administrator and usufructuary of public buildings, real estate, forests, and agricultural estates belonging to the hostile State, and situated in the occupied country. It must safeguard the capital of these properties, and administer them in accordance with the rules of usufruct.

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/0/1d1726425f6955aec125641e0038bfd6

[3]

[QUESTION] 6 
HOW CAN YOU ACCUSE ISRAEL OF APARTHEID WHEN ISRAELIVOTE IN NATIONAL ELECTIONS, HAVE PASSPORTS, MOVE FREELY,AND SERVE IN THE KNESSET?
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCHQ & A: A TRESHOLD CROSSEDISRAELI AUTHORITIES AND THE CRIME OF APARTHEIDAND PERSECUTION

https://www.hrw.org/news/2021/04/27/qa-threshold-crossed#How_can_you

ORIGINELE BRON

HUMAN RIGHTS WATCHQ & A: A TRESHOLD CROSSEDISRAELI AUTHORITIES AND THE CRIME OF APARTHEIDAND PERSECUTION

https://www.hrw.org/news/2021/04/27/qa-threshold-crossed

”We found the three elements of the crime of apartheid all come together in the OPT, pursuant to a single Israeli government policy. That policy is to maintain the domination of Jewish Israelis over Palestinians from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. In the OPT, that intent has been coupled with systematic oppression and inhumane acts committed against Palestinians living there.”

[QUESTION] 7ARE YOU SAYING THAT THERE IS APARTHEIDWITHIN THE GREEN LINE , THE INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED BORDERS OFTHE STATE OF ISRAEL?OR ONLY IN THE WEST BANK AND GAZA?
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCHQ & A: A TRESHOLD CROSSEDISRAELI AUTHORITIES AND THE CRIME OF APARTHEIDAND PERSECUTION

https://www.hrw.org/news/2021/04/27/qa-threshold-crossed#Are_you_saying

”The 213-page report, “A Threshold Crossed: Israeli Authorities and the Crimes of Apartheid and Persecution,” examines Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. It presents the present-day reality of a single authority, the Israeli government, ruling primarily over the area between the Jordan River and Mediterranean Sea, populated by two groups of roughly equal size, and methodologically privileging Jewish Israelis while repressing Palestinians, most severely in the occupied territory.”

HUMAN RIGHTS WATCHABUSIVE ISRAELI POLICIES CONSTITUTE CRIMES OFAPARTHEID, PERSECUTIONCRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY SHOULD TRIGGER ACTION TO END REPRESSION AGAINST PALESTINIANS

https://www.hrw.org/news/2021/04/27/abusive-israeli-policies-constitute-crimes-apartheid-persecution

(Jerusalem) – Israeli authorities are committing the crimes against humanity of apartheid and persecution, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. The finding is based on an overarching Israeli government policy to maintain the domination by Jewish Israelis over Palestinians and grave abuses committed against Palestinians living in the occupied territory, including East Jerusalem.

The 213-page report, “A Threshold Crossed: Israeli Authorities and the Crimes of Apartheid and Persecution,” examines Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. It presents the present-day reality of a single authority, the Israeli government, ruling primarily over the area between the Jordan River and Mediterranean Sea, populated by two groups of roughly equal size, and methodologically privileging Jewish Israelis while repressing Palestinians, most severely in the occupied territory.April 27, 2021

Q&A: A Threshold Crossed

Israeli Authorities and the Crimes of Apartheid and Persecution


“Prominent voices have warned for years that apartheid lurks just around the corner if the trajectory of Israel’s rule over Palestinians does not change,” said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch. “This detailed study shows that Israeli authorities have already turned that corner and today are committing the crimes against humanity of apartheid and persecution.”

The finding of apartheid and persecution does not change the legal status of the occupied territory, made up of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and Gaza, or the factual reality of occupation.

Originally coined in relation to South Africa, apartheid today is a universal legal term. The prohibition against particularly severe institutional discrimination and oppression or apartheid constitutes a core principle of international law. The 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid and the 1998 Rome Statute to the International Criminal Court (ICC) define apartheid as a crime against humanity consisting of three primary elements:

  1. An intent to maintain domination by one racial group over another.
  2. A context of systematic oppression by the dominant group over the marginalized group.
  3. Inhumane acts.

The reference to a racial group is understood today to address not only treatment on the basis of genetic traits but also treatment on the basis of descent and national or ethnic origin, as defined in the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination. Human Rights Watch applies this broader understanding of race.

The crime against humanity of persecution, as defined under the Rome Statute and customary international law, consists of severe deprivation of fundamental rights of a racial, ethnic, or other group with discriminatory intent.

Human Rights Watch found that the elements of the crimes come together in the occupied territory, as part of a single Israeli government policy. That policy is to maintain the domination by Jewish Israelis over Palestinians across Israel and the occupied territory. It is coupled in the occupied territory with systematic oppression and inhumane acts against Palestinians living there.

Drawing on years of human rights documentation, case studies, and a review of government planning documents, statements by officials, and other sources, Human Rights Watch compared policies and practices toward Palestinians in the occupied territory and Israel with those concerning Jewish Israelis living in the same areas. Human Rights Watch wrote to the Israeli government in July 2020, soliciting its perspectives on these issues, but has received no response.

Across Israel and the occupied territory, Israeli authorities have sought to maximize the land available for Jewish communities and to concentrate most Palestinians in dense population centers. The authorities have adopted policies to mitigate what they have openly described as a “demographic threat” from Palestinians. In Jerusalem, for example, the government’s plan for the municipality, including both the west and occupied east parts of the city, sets the goal of “maintaining a solid Jewish majority in the city” and even specifies the demographic ratios it hopes to maintain.

To maintain domination, Israeli authorities systematically discriminate against Palestinians. The institutional discrimination that Palestinian citizens of Israel face includes laws that allow hundreds of small Jewish towns to effectively exclude Palestinians and budgets that allocate only a fraction of resources to Palestinian schools as compared to those that serve Jewish Israeli children. In the occupied territory, the severity of the repression, including the imposition of draconian military rule on Palestinians while affording Jewish Israelis living in a segregated manner in the same territory their full rights under Israel’s rights-respecting civil law, amounts to the systematic oppression required for apartheid.

Israeli authorities have committed a range of abuses against Palestinians. Many of those in the occupied territory constitute severe abuses of fundamental rights and the inhumane acts again required for apartheid, including: sweeping movement restrictions in the form of the Gaza closure and a permit regime, confiscation of more than a third of the land in the West Bank, harsh conditions in parts of the West Bank that led to the forcible transfer of thousands of Palestinians out of their homes, denial of residency rights to hundreds of thousands of Palestinians and their relatives, and the suspension of basic civil rights to millions of Palestinians.

Many of the abuses at the core of the commission of these crimes, such as near-categorical denial of building permits to Palestinians and demolition of thousands of homes on the pretext of lacking permits, have no security justification. Others, such as Israel’s effective freeze on the population registry it manages in the occupied territory, which all but blocks family reunification for Palestinians living there and bars Gaza residents from living in the West Bank, use security as a pretext to further demographic goals. Even when security forms part of the motivation, it no more justifies apartheid and persecution than it would excessive force or torture, Human Rights Watch said.

“Denying millions of Palestinians their fundamental rights, without any legitimate security justification and solely because they are Palestinian and not Jewish, is not simply a matter of an abusive occupation,” Roth said. “These policies, which grant Jewish Israelis the same rights and privileges wherever they live and discriminate against Palestinians to varying degrees wherever they live, reflect a policy to privilege one people at the expense of another.”

Statements and actions by Israeli authorities in recent years, including the passage of a law with constitutional status in 2018 establishing Israel as the “nation-state of the Jewish people,” the growing body of laws that further privilege Israeli settlers in the West Bank and do not apply to Palestinians living in the same territory, as well as the massive expansion in recent years of settlements and accompanying infrastructure connecting settlements to Israel, have clarified their intent to maintain the domination by Jewish Israelis. The possibility that a future Israeli leader might someday forge a deal with Palestinians that dismantles the discriminatory system does not negate that reality today.

Israeli authorities should dismantle all forms of repression and discrimination that privilege Jewish Israelis at the expense of Palestinians, including with regards to freedom of movement, allocation of land and resources, access to water, electricity, and other services, and the granting of building permits.

The ICC Office of the Prosecutor should investigate and prosecute those credibly implicated in the crimes against humanity of apartheid and persecution. Countries should do so as well in accordance with their national laws under the principle of universal jurisdiction, and impose individual sanctions, including travel bans and asset freezes, on officials responsible for committing these crimes.

The findings of crimes against humanity should prompt the international community to reevaluate the nature of its engagement in Israel and Palestine and adopt an approach centered on human rights and accountability rather than solely on the stalled “peace process.” Countries should establish a UN commission of inquiry to investigate systematic discrimination and repression in Israel and Palestine and a UN global envoy for the crimes of persecution and apartheid with a mandate to mobilize international action to end persecution and apartheid worldwide.

Countries should condition arms sales and military and security assistance to Israel on Israeli authorities taking concrete and verifiable steps toward ending their commission of these crimes. Countries should vet agreements, cooperation schemes, and all forms of trade and dealing with Israel to screen for those directly contributing to committing the crimes, mitigate the human rights impacts and, where not possible, end activities and funding found to facilitate these serious crimes.

“While much of the world treats Israel’s half-century occupation as a temporary situation that a decades-long ‘peace process’ will soon cure, the oppression of Palestinians there has reached a threshold and a permanence that meets the definitions of the crimes of apartheid and persecution,” Roth said. “Those who strive for Israeli-Palestinian peace, whether a one or two-state solution or a confederation, should in the meantime recognize this reality for what it is and bring to bear the sorts of human rights tools needed to end it.”

”Israel has maintained military rule over some portion of the Palestinian population for all but six months of its 73-year history. It did so over the vast majority of Palestinians inside Israel from 1948 and until 1966. From 1967 until the present, it has militarily ruled over Palestinians in the OPT, excluding East Jerusalem. By contrast, it has since its founding governed all Jewish Israelis, including settlers in the OPT since the beginning of the occupation in 1967, under its more rights-respecting civil law.”

REPORT HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH:
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCHA TRESHOLD CROSSEDISRAELI AUTHORITIES AND THE CRIME OF APARTHEID AND PERSECUTION

27 APRIL 2021

https://www.hrw.org/report/2021/04/27/threshold-crossed/israeli-authorities-and-crimes-apartheid-and-persecution

[4]

  Article 7 Crimes against humanity 

1. For the purpose of this Statute, “crime against humanity” means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack: 

(a) Murder;

 (b) Extermination;

 (c) Enslavement; 

(d) Deportation or forcible transfer of population; 

(e) Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law; 

(f) Torture;

 (g) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity; 

(h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court;

 (i) Enforced disappearance of persons;

 (j) The crime of apartheid;

….

…. 

ROME STATUTE OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT

https://www.icc-cpi.int/resource-library/Documents/RS-Eng.pdf

[5]

LADY MACBETH

Here’s the smell of the blood still: all the
perfumes of Arabia will not sweeten this little
hand. Oh, oh, oh! MAC BETH ACT V, SCENE I http://shakespeare.mit.edu/macbeth/full.html

[6]
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCHJERUSALEM TO GAZA: ISRAELI AUTHORITIES REASSERTDOMINATION
https://www.hrw.org/news/2021/05/11/jerusalem-gaza-israeli-authorities-reassert-domination

Forcible takeovers of homes, brutal suppression of demonstrators, places of worship under assault, identity-based communal violence, indiscriminate rocket attacks, children killed in strikes: what to make of the dizzying headlines out of Israel and Palestine in recent days?

Without doubt, the recent events in Gaza and Jerusalem have given rise to grave abuses. We are investigating and will take some time as we gather the facts. There are, though, some preliminary takeaways based on what we do know. 

The escalation began over the move to take over several Palestinian homes in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood of East Jerusalem, which Israel has annexed but is occupied territory under international law. Israel planned to evict the Palestinian residents and transfer their longtime homes to Jewish settlers. Israeli courts allowed these moves under a 1970 Israeli law that facilitates the return of property to Jewish owners or their heirs, including Jewish associations acting on their behalf, that they claim to have owned in East Jerusalem prior to 1948, when Jordanian authorities assumed control until 1967.

The Palestinian families involved had earlier been displaced from inside what is today Israel. They are barred by law from reclaiming their land and homes, which the Israeli authorities confiscated, along with land belonging to many other displaced Palestinians, as “absentee property” in the aftermath of the events around the establishment of the state of Israel between 1947 and 1949. A final court ruling on the matter is expected soon.

This discriminatory treatment, with the exact opposite legal outcomes for claims of pre-1948 title to property based on whether the claimant is a Jewish Israeli or a Palestinian, underscores the reality of apartheid that Palestinians in East Jerusalem face. Nearly all Palestinians who live in East Jerusalem hold a conditional, revocable residency status, while Jewish Israelis in the same area are citizens with secure status. Palestinians live in densely populated enclaves that receive a fraction of the resources given to settlements and effectively cannot obtain building permits, while neighboring Israeli settlements built on expropriated Palestinian land flourish.

Israeli officials have intentionally created this discriminatory system under which Jewish Israelis thrive at the expense of Palestinians. The government’s plan for the Jerusalem municipality, including both the west and occupied east parts of the city, sets the goal of “maintaining a solid Jewish majority in the city” and even specifies the demographic ratios it hopes to maintain. This intent to dominate underlies Israel’s crimes against humanity of apartheid and persecution, which Human Rights Watch documented in a recent report.

To protest the planned Sheikh Jarrah evictions, Palestinians held demonstrations around East Jerusalem, some of which included incidents of rock-throwing. Israeli forces responded by firing teargas, stun grenades, and rubber-coated steel bullets, including inside al-Aqsa Mosque, injuring 1000 Palestinians, 735 by rubber bullets, between May 7 and May 10, according to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). At least 32 Israeli officers have also been injured, according to figures cited by OCHA.

These practices stem from a decades-long pattern of Israeli authorities using excessive and vastly disproportionate force to quell protests and disturbances by Palestinians, often resulting in serious injury and loss of life.

Protests later broke out both in the West Bank and inside Israel.

Seeking to take advantage of the opportunity to brandish their image as defenders of al-Aqsa Mosque, Hamas and Palestinian armed groups in Gaza fired rockets at Israeli population centers. Three people in Israel have been killed as a result, as of May 11. Such attacks, which are inherently indiscriminate and endanger the lives, homes, and properties of tens of thousands of Israeli civilians, are war crimes, as Human Rights Watch has extensively documented over the years.

In response, Israeli forces launched airstrikes in the Gaza Strip. The Palestinian Health Ministry reported on May 11 that these strikes killed 30 Palestinians, including 10 children, though there are reports that some may have been killed in errant rocket attacks by Palestinian armed groups. The legality of each strike requires thorough investigations, but the use of explosive weapons with wide area effects in the densely populated Gaza Strip, where more than 2 million Palestinians live in a strip of territory that is 41 kilometers long and between 6 and 12 kilometers wide, and targeting at times of residential buildings is likely to harm civilians.

During armed hostilities over the last decade plus, Human Rights Watch has documented the regular use of excessive and vastly disproportionate force by Israeli authorities, at times deliberately targeting civilians or civilian infrastructure.

For years, this cycle of escalation has played on loop, at varying degrees of intensity. Even if the immediate crisis subsides, the vicious cycle will continue so long as impunity for serious abuses remains the norm and the international community fails to take the sort of measures to ensure accountability that a situation of this gravity warrants.

END OF THE ARTICLE

[7]

6. Basque company CAF is contracted to extend Israel’s Jerusalem Light Rail (JLR) tram service to illegal settlements. Settlements are defined as war crimes under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The JLR passes through Sheikh Jarrah where illegal settlers backed by the Israeli state, their military, and police forces, are attempting to ethnically cleanse Palestinian Sheikh Jarrah.

Use social media to demand #CAFGetOffIsraelsApartheidTrain

EAST JERUSALEM: WHAT IS HAPPENING AND HOW YOU CAN TAKE ACTION NOW

https://bdsmovement.net/news/east-jerusalem-what-happening-and-how-you-can-take-action-now

Watching apartheid Israel’s bloody crushing of popular Palestinian protests in Sheikh Jarrah and occupied Jerusalme calls us to action. We have proven before our collective power in the form of #BDS. Here are 9 actions you can take to fight Israeli impunity and #SaveSheikhJarrah.

Over the last number of weeks Palestinian protests to #SaveSheikhJarrah, in occupied East Jerusalem, have grown in size. They have been met with brutal repression by Israeli apartheid security forces, including police officers trained in Israel’s police training academy partially owned by G4S and Allied Universal. 

Indigenous Palestinian residents of Sheikh Jarrah have fought lengthy legal battles in Israeli courts against eviction orders which would see them ethnically cleansed, forcefully evicted from their homes, and replaced with illegal Israeli settlers.

At the beginning of May, Israeli settlers submitted their response to the rightful claims of the residents of Sheikh Jarrah to the Israeli court, an apparatus of Israel’s apartheid regime. 

The Palestinian families were then given time to reach an “agreement” with the settlers regarding the right to their homes. Sheikh Jarrah belongs to the Palestinian families. It is part of the occupied Palestinian territory, and therefore any Israeli settler presence in it amounts to a war crime under international law. Israel’s settlement enterprise is an integral part of its apartheid system against all Palestinians.

The Israeli court decision to give a period of time to “both sides” to seek a compromise and reach an agreement is colonial gaslighting. It is also a tactic used to exhaust the ongoing protests and public pressure to #SaveSheikhJarrah. More protests are scheduled to take place over the coming days, and residents vow to remain steadfast.

In Silwan, another East Jerusalem neighbourhood, extremist settlers backed by the Israeli state want to take over the homes of seven Palestinian families who are also fighting lengthy legal battles in Israeli courts.

In occupied Jerusalem, Israel keeps a 60:40 demographic ratio between Jews and Arabs. All ‘excess’ Palestinians are under threat of forced transfer.

In April, Human Rights Watch published their histories report ‘A Threshold Crossed – Israeli Authorities and the Crimes of Apartheid and Persecution‘ outlining Israel’s demographic plans for Jerusalem.

In Jerusalem, the government’s plan for the municipality, including both the west and occupied east of the city, sets the goal of “maintaining a solid Jewish majority in the city” and a target demographic “ratio of 70% Jews and 30% Arabs”—later adjusted to a 60:40 ratio after authorities acknowledged that “this goal is not attainable” in light of “the demographic trend.”

Watching from afar Israel’s brutal violence against unarmed Palestinian protestors defending their homes and dignity can evoke feelings of anger mixed with powerlessness. We have proven before that collective action in the form of #BDS works best to express true and effective solidarity. Here are 9 actions you can take to fight Israeli impunity and #SaveSheikhJarrah 

TAKE ACTION

  1. First, use the power of social media to highlight what is happening. Use #SaveSheikhJarrah and #SaveSilwan in all of your social media posts. Share images and videos from activists who are facing social media censorship. Amplify the voices of the Palestinian residents of Sheikh Jarrah and Silwan.
     
  2. Last week Human Rights Watch stated in their groundbreaking report what Palestinians have been saying for decades. Israel is an apartheid state. Now the global consensus is building. Israel’s regime of oppression, including its actions in Sheikh Jarrah, fits the UN definition of apartheid. We can work together to dismantle Israeli apartheid, as global solidarity and boycotts helped to end South African apartheid.Support our campaign and use #UNInvestigateApartheid on social media to add your voice to the global call.
     
  3. Israeli security companies make millions of dollars in global exports every year by selling goods and services tested on Indigenous Palestinians, including those struggling against ethnic cleansing in occupied Jerusalem.  AnyVision’s facial recognition system and NSO’s spying technology are among the most obvious examples of apartheid Israel’s tools of mass surveillance and repression. Israel tries them on Palestinians and exports them to dictatorships and far-right governments worldwide to support their crimes and human rights violations.Pressure your parliament/government to impose a #MilitaryEmbargo against Israel.
     
  4. G4S and now Allied Universal own a 25% stake in Israel’s national police academy where Israeli police learn brutal & violent repression being used against residents and activists in Sheikh Jarrah and Silwan. Some of these militarized tactics end up being shared with U.S. and other police forces during joint training.Join our letter-writing campaign and urge Allied Universal executives to divest from Israeli apartheid.On social media use #StopG4S to demand they divest from Israeli apartheid.
  5. Hewlett Packard Enterprise and Hewlett Packard (HPE and HP) play key roles in Israel’s regime of military occupation, settler-colonialism and apartheid against the Indigenous Palestinians. They provide computer systems to the Israeli army and maintain data centres through their servers for the Israeli police who are violently repressing peaceful protestors defending their homes in Sheikh Jarrah and Silwan.Sign the international pledge and use #BoycottHP on social media.
     
  6. Basque company CAF is contracted to extend Israel’s Jerusalem Light Rail (JLR) tram service to illegal settlements. Settlements are defined as war crimes under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The JLR passes through Sheikh Jarrah where illegal settlers backed by the Israeli state, their military, and police forces, are attempting to ethnically cleanse Palestinian Sheikh Jarrah.Use social media to demand #CAFGetOffIsraelsApartheidTrain
     
  7. German sportswear manufacturer PUMA sponsors the Israel Football Association, which includes teams and pitches in illegal Israeli settlements, including Givat HaMivtar, just north of Sheikh Jarrah in occupied East Jerusalem. Join the campaign launched by 200 Palestinian teams to #BoycottPuma.Share social media actions hijacking PUMA’s #OnlySeeGreat campaign with Palestinians #OnlySeeApartheid.
     
  8. Boycott all products from Israel’s colonial settlements! Israeli produce like dates and avocados, many of which are produced by companies operating in settlements, can be found in local supermarkets. Demand your supermarket to stop stocking them.
     
  9. International action can help stop Israel in its tracks. Email or call the elected officials in your country and urge them to adopt Human Rights Watch findings on Israeli apartheid and, crucially, its recommendations to condition all relations with Israel on dismantling its apartheid regime.

END OF THE ARTICLE

CAF: GET OUT OF SHEIKH JARRAH!

https://bdsmovement.net/caf-get-out-of-sheikh-jarrah

This Saturday June 5 is the annual shareholder meeting of CAF, a Basque company that is building the Jerusalem Light Rail (JLR), a tram line serving Israel’s illegal settlements in Jerusalem.

The JLR passes through occupied Jerusalem including the Palestinian neighbourhood of Sheikh Jarrah, which Israel wants to ethnically cleanse.

We need your help to pressure CAF shareholders: CAF must end its complicity with Israel’s violent occupation of Jerusalem.

Four Palestinian families are facing eviction from their Jerusalem homes in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood. Over the past few weeks, Israeli settlers, with the backing of lsrael’s military and police forces, have violently attacked Palestinians in Sheikh Jarrah and the rest of occupied Jerusalem. 

This last wave of attacks is not new and is a core part of Israel’s systemic ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in Jerusalem- which is illegal under international law.

Palestinians in Sheikh Jarrah are resilient and defiant, and despite Israel’s brutal attacks, they will not give up their rights to their homes.

You can stand with them by pressuring CAF to abandon the project to build Israel’s colonial tramway. 

Pressure works, and there is a precedent. Two weeks ago, the Norwegian Oil Fund divested from CAF’s partner in the Jerusalem Light Rail, the Israeli company Shapir, due to its complicity in human rights violations. The Norwegian Oil Fund is also a shareholder of CAF.

On Saturday, CAF shareholders have a choice to make: take the company out of Sheikh Jarrah, and occupied Jerusalem, or face losing lucrative contracts around the world through BDS action.

END OF ARTICLE

[8]

”Under the “disengagement” plan endorsed Tuesday by the Knesset, Israeli forces will keep control over Gaza’s borders, coastline and airspace, and will reserve the right to launch incursions at will. Israel will continue to wield overwhelming power over the territory’s economy and its access to trade.

“The removal of settlers and most military forces will not end Israel’s control over Gaza,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch’s Middle East and North Africa Division. “Israel plans to reconfigure its occupation of the territory, but it will remain an occupying power with responsibility for the welfare of the civilian population.”

HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH

ISRAEL: DISENGAGEMENT WILL NOT

END GAZA OCCUPATION’

https://www.hrw.org/news/2004/10/28/israel-disengagement-will-not-end-gaza-occupation

TEXT

Israeli Government Still Holds Responsibility for Welfare of Civilians

The Israeli government’s plan to remove troops and Jewish settlements from the Gaza Strip would not end Israel’s occupation of the territory. As an occupying power, Israel will retain responsibility for the welfare of Gaza’s civilian population.

Under the “disengagement” plan endorsed Tuesday by the Knesset, Israeli forces will keep control over Gaza’s borders, coastline and airspace, and will reserve the right to launch incursions at will. Israel will continue to wield overwhelming power over the territory’s economy and its access to trade.

“The removal of settlers and most military forces will not end Israel’s control over Gaza,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch’s Middle East and North Africa Division. “Israel plans to reconfigure its occupation of the territory, but it will remain an occupying power with responsibility for the welfare of the civilian population.”

Under the plan, Israel is scheduled to remove settlers and military bases protecting the settlers from the Gaza Strip and four isolated West Bank Jewish settlements by the end of 2005. The Israeli military will remain deployed on Gaza’s southern border, and will reposition its forces to other areas just outside the territory.

In addition to controlling the borders, coastline and airspace, Israel will continue to control Gaza’s telecommunications, water, electricity and sewage networks, as well as the flow of people and goods into and out of the territory. Gaza will also continue to use Israeli currency.

A World Bank study on the economic effects of the plan determined that “disengagement” would ease restrictions on mobility inside Gaza. But the study also warned that the removal of troops and settlers would have little positive effect unless accompanied by an opening of Gaza’s borders. If the borders are sealed to labor and trade, the plan “would create worse hardship than is seen today.”

The plan also explicitly envisions continued home demolitions by the Israeli military to expand the “buffer zone” along the Gaza-Egypt border. According to a report released last week by Human Rights Watch, the Israeli military has illegally razed nearly 1,600 homes since 2000 to create this buffer zone, displacing some 16,000 Palestinians. Israeli officials have called for the buffer zone to be doubled, which would result in the destruction of one-third of the Rafah refugee camp.

In addition, the plan states that disengagement “will serve to dispel the claims regarding Israel’s responsibility for the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.” A report by legal experts from the Israeli Justice Ministry, Foreign Ministry and the military made public on Sunday, however, reportedly acknowledges that disengagement “does not necessarily exempt Israel from responsibility in the evacuated territories.”

If Israel removes its troops from Gaza, the Palestinian National Authority will maintain responsibility for security within the territory—to the extent that Israel allows Palestinian police the authority and capacity. Palestinian security forces will still have a duty to protect civilians within Gaza and to prevent indiscriminate attacks on Israeli civilians.

“Under international law, the test for determining whether an occupation exists is effective control by a hostile army, not the positioning of troops,” Whitson said. “Whether the Israeli army is inside Gaza or redeployed around its periphery and restricting entrance and exit, it remains in control.”

Under international law, the duties of an occupying power are detailed in the Fourth Geneva Convention and The Hague Regulations. According to The Hague Regulations, a “territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised.”

END OF ARTICLE

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

PATTERNS OF ISRAELI ATTACKS ON RESIDENTIAL

HOMES IN GAZA MUST INVESTIGATED AS WARCRIMES

17 MAY 2021

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2021/05/israelopt-pattern-of-israeli-attacks-on-residential-homes-in-gaza-must-be-investigated-as-war-crimes/

Israeli forces have displayed a shocking disregard for the lives of Palestinian civilians by carrying out a number of airstrikes targeting residential buildings in some cases killing entire families – including children – and causing wanton destruction to civilian property, in attacks that may amount to war crimes or crimes against humanity, said Amnesty International today.

The organization has documented four deadly attacks by Israel launched on residential homes without prior warning and is calling for the International Criminal Court (ICC) to urgently investigate these attacks. The death toll in Gaza continues to climb with at least 198 Palestinians killed including 58 children and more than 1,220 injured. Ten people in Israel, including two children, have been killed and at least 27 injured by Palestinian attacks.

“There is a horrific pattern emerging of Israel launching air strikes in Gaza targeting residential buildings and family homes – in some cases entire families were buried beneath the rubble when the buildings they lived in collapsed.  In the cases documented below, no prior warning was given to the civilian residents to allow them to escape. Under international humanitarian law, all parties must distinguish between military targets and civilian objects and direct their attacks only at military objectives. When carrying out attacks, parties must take all feasible precautions to minimize harm to civilians,” said Saleh Higazi, Deputy Director for the Middle East and North Africa.

“Although the Israeli military has given no explanation of what military objectives it was targeting in these attacks, it is hard to imagine how bombing residential buildings full of civilian families without warning could be considered proportionate under international humanitarian law. It is not possible to use large explosive weapons, like aircraft bombs that have a blast radius of many hundreds of meters, in populated areas without anticipating major civilian casualties.

“By carrying out these brazen deadly attacks on family homes without warning Israel has demonstrated a callous disregard for lives of Palestinian civilians who are already suffering the collective punishment of Israel’s illegal blockade on Gaza since 2007.”

The Israeli army claims that it only attacks military targets and has justified airstrikes on residential buildings on that basis. However, residents told Amnesty International that there were no fighters or military objectives in the vicinity at the time of the attacks documented.

“Deliberate attacks on civilians and civilian property and infrastructure are war crimes, as are disproportionate attacks. The International Criminal Court has an active investigation into the situation in Palestine and should urgently investigate these attacks as war crimes. States should also consider exercising universal jurisdiction over those who commit war crimes. Impunity only works to fuel the pattern of unlawful attacks and civilian bloodshed, which have we have repeatedly documented in previous Israeli military offensives on Gaza,” said Saleh Higazi.

At least 152 residential properties in Gaza have been destroyed since 11 May, according to the Gaza-based human rights organization, Al Mezan Center for Human Rights. According to the Palestinian Ministry of Public Works and Housing in Gaza, Israeli strikes have destroyed 94 buildings, comprising 461 housing and commercial units while 285 housing units have been severely damaged and rendered uninhabitable.

According to United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UNOCHA) more than 2,500 people have been made homeless due to the destruction of their homes and more than 38,000 people have been internally displaced and have sought shelter in 48 UNRWA schools across Gaza.

Indiscriminate rocket-fire by Palestinian armed groups towards civilian areas of Israel has also killed and injured civilians and damaged homes and other civilian properties. The rockets fired from Gaza into Israel are imprecise and their use violates international humanitarian law which prohibits the use of weapons that are by nature indiscriminate. These attacks should also be investigated by the ICC as war crimes.

Amnesty International has previously published evidence that the Israeli military had a deliberate policy of targeting family homes during the 2014 conflict.

Devastating attacks on family homes

In one of the heaviest episodes of bombardment since the latest fighting began, between 1am and 2am on 16 May Israel carried out airstrikes against residential buildings and streets in Gaza City. The attacks completely destroyed two residential buildings belonging to the Abu al-Ouf and al-Kolaq families – killing 30 people – 11 of them children. 

Gaza’s Ministry of Labour building was also destroyed in the attacks. The attack blocked al-Wehda Street, one of the main roads leading to the main hospital in Gaza, al-Shifa.

The families residing in the four-storey al-Ouf building, which included residential apartments and shops, received no prior warning – they were buried beneath the rubble in the attack. 

Yousef Yassin, a medic from al-Shifa Hospital, was one of the first to arrive on the scene of al-Ouf Building after the attack and helped pull survivors from the wreckage with the Red Crescent. He described the scene to Amnesty International as one of “great destruction”.

“I helped get out four dead [bodies], but there were many more. It was very hard. There was no warning, so people were inside their home sitting together, and this is a lively, bustling area,” he said. 

Shortly before midnight on 14 May Israeli air strikes hit the three-storey building of the al-Atar family in Beit Lahia killing 28-year-old Lamya Hassan Mohammed Al-Atar her three children Islam, seven, Amira, six, and Mohammed an eight-month-old baby. 

Lamya’s father, Hassan Al-Atar, a civil defence officer told Amnesty International he headed to the scene of the attack with an ambulance and rescue team after a relative called him with news of the attack.  “He told me that our home had been bombed and [he was] stuck under the rubble [with his] wife and children,” he said.

“I arrived at the house, which is made up of three stories – 20 people live there – I tried to find people, but I could not. Then the rescue team arrived to help and we eventually found my daughter, a mother of three, with her children, one of whom was a baby, under one of the cement pillars of the house; all of them were dead. The other residents seem to have managed to escape from an opening after the bombing and got to the hospital. I was shocked,” he said.

Nader Mahmoud Mohammed Al-Thom, from al-Salatin neighbourhood in Beit Lahia, described how his home where he lives with eight others was attacked without any warning shortly after midnight on 15 May.

“There was no warning missile, no warning call, the house was bombed, and we were inside. Thank God that the civil defence and by sheer chance was close by and saved us from under the rubble, thank God no one died. We had injuries but not serious, when we got out I saw a fire at the gate of the house, then the ambulance took us to the hospital. I think this is when I lost consciousness. Thank God no one was badly hurt but we lost our house. We are now in the street; we do not know where to go what to do.” 

His family sought shelter at an UNRWA school but the school they arrived at was closed when they arrived and they had to sleep outside in the school yard. His entire home was destroyed including his clothes, money and paperwork and all their belongings.

In addition to residential homes, Israeli attacks have damaged water and electricity infrastructure as well as medical facilities and halted the operations of the North Gaza Seawater Desalination plant, which supplies water to more than 250,000 people.  

END OF THE ARTICLE

[9]

WIKIPEDIA

DIXI

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dixi

FORMER LETTER TO CAF!


Astrid Essed 
Mon, Nov 30, 2020, 10:49 PM
to caf@caf.net

TOCAF 
Director and ManagementSubject: Involvement with the illegal Israeli settlements

Dear Director,Dear Management,

Sometimes I ask myself, how on earth it is possible, that there arestill companies, that work with notorious thieves and villains likeoccupation countries, helping them with stealing and robbering!Alas I have learnt, that your company, the Basque Spanish multinational CAF [Construcciones Y Auxiliar de Ferocarilles], is notorious for that, sincein August 2019, a consortium, led by your CAF and the Israeli infrastructurecompany Shapir was selected by Israel’s finance ministry, to lead the expansionof the Jerusalem Light Rail, serving Israel’s illegal settlements in occupiedPalestinian territory. Look for all the information under note 1!
I think it is a shame and disgrace, that your company signed for openly violatingInternational Law and human rights!Your company must be  beaten virtually for this.
ISRAELI OCCUPATION
Although it should not be necessary, for your sake someinformation about the Israeli settlements.Of course you know about the now 53 years Israeli occupation of thePalestinian territories the West Bank, Eastern Jerusalem and Gaza [2],despite UN Security Resolution 242 [3] and all subsequent resolutions.As an occupation regime, Israel is responsible for and guilty ofstructural repression, human rights violations and systematic warcrimes [4] and crimes of humanity like ethnic cleansings. [5]
So even when there were no illegal settlements, you should notcooperate with the Israeli occupation State!

ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS
You know, or else you should know, that all Israeli settlements, built onthe occupied Palestinian territories are illegal according under International Law,according to article 49. 4th Geneva Convention, as the the Hague Convention. [6]
Not only this settlement building is pure land theft, not seldom the settlers [theIsraeli inhabitants of the illegal settlements] are very agressive towards theoccupied Palestinian population as the Israeli human rights organization Btselem mentions.[7]And the worst part is, that those agressive settlers are often supported by Israeli Security Forces! [8]

EPILOGUE
I have presented you with the facts.The facts you already knew, or should have known otherwise.I don’t know, what’s worse.

By leading the expansion of the Jerusalem Light Railand thus serving  Israel’s illegal settlements in occupied Palestinian territory, you are notonly tainted by your cooperation with a criminal occupation regime, alsoyou are complicit in landtheft and de fcato expulsion of the occupiedPalestinian population from their own ground.
Is that the way you earn your money.Your BLOODmoney?
Shame on you!

If you have any conscience and decency, withdraw from youractivities, helping the illegal settlements in occupied Palestinianterritory.Evil practices.
If not:
Then History will put you on the black list, ading war criminalsand criminals against humanity.
DIXI! [Latin: I have said, I have spoken] [9]

Kind greetings
Astrid EssedAmsterdam The Netherlands

NOTES

[1]

WIKIPEDIAJERUSALEM LIGHT RAIL
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem_Light_Rail

INTERNATIONAL RAILWAY JOURNAL.COMCAF AND SHAPIR AWARDED JERUSALEM LIGHTRAIL PROJECT CONTRACT

TEXT

JERUSALEM Transportation Masterplan Team (JTMT) has awarded the TransJerusalem J-Net consortium, comprised of CAF and the construction firm Shapir, a €1.8bn contract to undertake an extension to the Jerusalem light rail network.

The Private-Public Partnership (PPP) includes the construction of 27km of new track, 53 new stations and various depots covering a 6.8km extension to the Red Line, and the new 20.6km Green Line. The Red Line is currently 13.8km long with 23 stations, and carries around 145,000 passengers daily.

The consortium will also design and supply 114 new Urbos LRVs for the Green Line, and the refurbishment of the 46 vehicles currently in service on the Red Line.

The contract includes the signalling, energy and communication systems, as well as the operation and maintenance of both lines for 15 and 25 years respectively, with the possibility of extending the term of operation.

CAF’s share of the contract is worth more than €500m, and includes the vehicle’s supply and refurbishment, signalling, energy and communication systems and project integration. CAF will also have a 50% stake in the Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) company that will manage the operation and maintenance of both lines, which is expected to have a €1bn turnover.

Construction is expected begin later this year with the new extensions fully operational by 2025.

Shikun & Binui and Egged (Israel), CRRC (China), Comsa (Spain), Efatec (Portugal) and MPK (Poland) also submitted bids for the contract.

END OF ARTICLE 

”Of the eight entities that participated in the preliminary stages, only two consortiums submitted bids in the final stage. The other consortium consisted in the companies Shikun & Binui and Egged (Israel), CRRC (China), Comsa (Spain), Efatec (Portugal) and MPK (Poland). Siemens, Alstom and Bombardier are reported to have left the tender process at an earlier stage. The companies did not officially withdraw from the process due to political reasons. Nevertheless, the light rail development in Jerusalem has been criticized in the past as both lines run through the disputed area of East Jerusalem”
URBAN TRANSPORT MAGAZINECAF-SAPHIR CONSORTIUM WINS JERUSALEM GEEN LINELIGHT RAIL TENDER

TEXT

The transport authority JTMT (Jerusalem Transportation Masterplan Team) has chosen the TransJerusalem J-Net Ltd consortium, consisting in the CAF Group and the construction firm Saphir, for the Jerusalem light rail project. The project value is 1.8 billion EUR.

The so-called Green line is a PPP (Private-Public Partnership) scheme and includes the construction of 20.6 kilometres of new track, 53 stations and a depot. Jerusalem opened its’ first light rail line, the red line in 2011. The new Green line uses the current Red Line on a stretch of 6.8 km. The contract also includes the design and supply of 114 low-floor Urbos trams (which will be operated as double-tractions) for the new Green Line and the refurbishment of the 46 units which are currently in service on the existing Red Line.

114 Urbos trams and 25 years of operation

The project scope of the consortium will also include the supply of the signalling, energy and communication systems, as well as the operation and maintenance of both lines for 15 and 25 years respectively, with the possibility of extending the term of operation. The CAF Group’s scope of this project exceeds 500 million EUR. The Group will also have a 50% stake in the company that will manage the operation and maintenance of both lines. The project is expected to be implemented this year with the new network fully operative by 2025.

The future network

The tram’s Red Line currently extends along 13.8 km with 23 stations distributed on the route, was inaugurated in 2011 and providing transport to over 145,000 passengers on average per day. The Green lines is expected to have a ridership of 200,000 passengers per day. It will link the two campuses of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and continue south via Pat junction to Gilo while using a common section with the Red line in the city centre until the terminus of the Tel Aviv – Jerusalem railway station which was inaugurated in 2018.

Of the eight entities that participated in the preliminary stages, only two consortiums submitted bids in the final stage. The other consortium consisted in the companies Shikun & Binui and Egged (Israel), CRRC (China), Comsa (Spain), Efatec (Portugal) and MPK (Poland). Siemens, Alstom and Bombardier are reported to have left the tender process at an earlier stage. The companies did not officially withdraw from the process due to political reasons. Nevertheless, the light rail development in Jerusalem has been criticized in the past as both lines run through the disputed area of East Jerusalem. 

END OF ARTICLEBDS MOVEMENTCAF/GET OF ISRAEL’S APARTHEID TRAIN

https://bdsmovement.net/boycott-caf

[2]
”Under the “disengagement” plan endorsed Tuesday by the Knesset, Israeli forces will keep control over Gaza’s borders, coastline and airspace, and will reserve the right to launch incursions at will. Israel will continue to wield overwhelming power over the territory’s economy and its access to trade.

“The removal of settlers and most military forces will not end Israel’s control over Gaza,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch’s Middle East and North Africa Division. “Israel plans to reconfigure its occupation of the territory, but it will remain an occupying power with responsibility for the welfare of the civilian population.”

HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH

ISRAEL: DISENGAGEMENT WILL NOT

END GAZA OCCUPATION

https://www.hrw.org/news/2004/10/28/israel-disengagement-will-not-end-gaza-occupation

TEXT

Israeli Government Still Holds Responsibility for Welfare of Civilians

The Israeli government’s plan to remove troops and Jewish settlements from the Gaza Strip would not end Israel’s occupation of the territory. As an occupying power, Israel will retain responsibility for the welfare of Gaza’s civilian population.

Under the “disengagement” plan endorsed Tuesday by the Knesset, Israeli forces will keep control over Gaza’s borders, coastline and airspace, and will reserve the right to launch incursions at will. Israel will continue to wield overwhelming power over the territory’s economy and its access to trade.

“The removal of settlers and most military forces will not end Israel’s control over Gaza,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch’s Middle East and North Africa Division. “Israel plans to reconfigure its occupation of the territory, but it will remain an occupying power with responsibility for the welfare of the civilian population.”

Under the plan, Israel is scheduled to remove settlers and military bases protecting the settlers from the Gaza Strip and four isolated West Bank Jewish settlements by the end of 2005. The Israeli military will remain deployed on Gaza’s southern border, and will reposition its forces to other areas just outside the territory.

In addition to controlling the borders, coastline and airspace, Israel will continue to control Gaza’s telecommunications, water, electricity and sewage networks, as well as the flow of people and goods into and out of the territory. Gaza will also continue to use Israeli currency.

A World Bank study on the economic effects of the plan determined that “disengagement” would ease restrictions on mobility inside Gaza. But the study also warned that the removal of troops and settlers would have little positive effect unless accompanied by an opening of Gaza’s borders. If the borders are sealed to labor and trade, the plan “would create worse hardship than is seen today.”

The plan also explicitly envisions continued home demolitions by the Israeli military to expand the “buffer zone” along the Gaza-Egypt border. According to a report released last week by Human Rights Watch, the Israeli military has illegally razed nearly 1,600 homes since 2000 to create this buffer zone, displacing some 16,000 Palestinians. Israeli officials have called for the buffer zone to be doubled, which would result in the destruction of one-third of the Rafah refugee camp.

In addition, the plan states that disengagement “will serve to dispel the claims regarding Israel’s responsibility for the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.” A report by legal experts from the Israeli Justice Ministry, Foreign Ministry and the military made public on Sunday, however, reportedly acknowledges that disengagement “does not necessarily exempt Israel from responsibility in the evacuated territories.”

If Israel removes its troops from Gaza, the Palestinian National Authority will maintain responsibility for security within the territory—to the extent that Israel allows Palestinian police the authority and capacity. Palestinian security forces will still have a duty to protect civilians within Gaza and to prevent indiscriminate attacks on Israeli civilians.

“Under international law, the test for determining whether an occupation exists is effective control by a hostile army, not the positioning of troops,” Whitson said. “Whether the Israeli army is inside Gaza or redeployed around its periphery and restricting entrance and exit, it remains in control.”

Under international law, the duties of an occupying power are detailed in the Fourth Geneva Convention and The Hague Regulations. According to The Hague Regulations, a “territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised.”

[3]

WIKIPEDIA

UNITED NATIONS SECURITY RESOLUTION 

242

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_242

[4]HUMAN RIGHTS WATCHRAIN OF FIRE: ISRAEL’S UNLAWFUL USE OF WHITE PHOSPHORUSIN GAZA
https://www.hrw.org/report/2009/03/25/rain-fire/israels-unlawful-use-white-phosphorus-gaza

HUMAN RIGHTS WATCHKILLING OF PALESTINIAN CIVILIANS DURING OPERATIONCAST LEAD
https://www.hrw.org/report/2009/08/13/white-flag-deaths/killings-palestinian-civilians-during-operation-cast-lead

”(Jerusalem) – At least 18 Israeli airstrikes during the fighting in Gaza in November 2012 were in apparent violation of the laws of war, Human Rights Watch said today after a detailed investigation into the attacks. These airstrikes killed at least 43 Palestinian civilians, including 12 children.”
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCHISRAEL: GAZA AIRSTRIKES VIOLATED LAWS OFWAR
https://www.hrw.org/news/2013/02/12/israel-gaza-airstrikes-violated-laws-war

AMNESTY INTERNATIONALA YEAR FROM DEADLY ISRAEL/GAZA CONFLICT, THE NIGHTMARE CONTINUES
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2013/11/year-deadly-israelgaza-conflict-nightmare-continues/

[5]

” Article 7 Crimes against humanity 1. For the purpose of this Statute, “crime against humanity” means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack: (a) Murder; (b) Extermination; (c) Enslavement; (d) Deportation or forcible transfer of population;

ROME STATUTE OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT

https://www.icc-cpi.int/resource-library/Documents/RS-Eng.pdf

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

ILLEGAL DEMOLITION AND FORICLE

TRANSFER OF BEDOUIN VILLAGE AMOUNTS 

TO WAR CRIME

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/06/israel-illegal-demolition-and-forcible-transfer-of-palestinian-bedouin-village-amounts-to-war-crime/
[6]
ILLEGALITY OF THE SETTLEMENTS

”Israel’s policy of settling its civilians in occupied Palestinian territory and displacing the local population contravenes fundamental rules of international humanitarian law.

Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention states: “The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.” It also prohibits the “individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory”. 

The extensive appropriation of land and the appropriation and destruction of property required to build and expand settlements also breach other rules of international humanitarian law. Under the Hague Regulations of 1907, the public property of the occupied population (such as lands, forests and agricultural estates) is subject to the laws of usufruct. This means that an occupying state is only allowed a very limited use of this property. This limitation is derived from the notion that occupation is temporary, the core idea of the law of occupation. In the words of the International Committee of the Red Cross, the occupying power “has a duty to ensure the protection, security, and welfare of the people living under occupation and to guarantee that they can live as normal a life as possible, in accordance with their own laws, culture, and traditions.”

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

CHAPTER 3: ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS AND INTERNATIONAL

LAW

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2019/01/chapter-3-israeli-settlements-and-international-law/

ARTICLE 49. 4TH GENEVA CONVENTION

ARTICLE 49 [ Link ]

Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive.
Nevertheless, the Occupying Power may undertake total or partial evacuation of a given area if the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand. Such evacuations may not involve the displacement of protected persons outside the bounds of the occupied territory except when for material reasons it is impossible to avoid such displacement. Persons thus evacuated shall be transferred back to their homes as soon as hostilities in the area in question have ceased.
The Occupying Power undertaking such transfers or evacuations shall ensure, to the greatest practicable extent, that proper accommodation is provided to receive the protected persons, that the removals are effected in satisfactory conditions of hygiene, health, safety and nutrition, and that members of the same family are not separated.
The Protecting Power shall be informed of any transfers and evacuations as soon as they have taken place.
The Occupying Power shall not detain protected persons in an area particularly exposed to the dangers of war unless the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand.
The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies. 

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/1a13044f3bbb5b8ec12563fb0066f226/523ba38706c71588c12563cd0042c407

THE HAGUE CONVENTION

ARTICLE 55

”Art. 55. The occupying State shall be regarded only as administrator and usufructuary of public buildings, real estate, forests, and agricultural estates belonging to the hostile State, and situated in the occupied country. It must safeguard the capital of these properties, and administer them in accordance with the rules of usufruct.

Treaties, States parties, and Commentaries – Hague Convention (IV) on War on Land and its Annexed Regulations, 1907 – –
Treaties, States parties, and Commentaries – Hague Convention (IV) on Wa…

[7]

BTSELEM.ORG

SETTLER VIOLENCE

https://www.btselem.org/topic/settler_violence

[8]

BTSELEM.ORG

ISRAELI SETTLERS STONE HOME IN BURIN, ESCORTED BY

SOLDIERS, WHO FIRE TEAR GAS AT RESIDENTS. CHILD FAINTS

FROM INHALATION

https://www.btselem.org/video/20201120_settlers_stone_homes_in_burin_and_soldiers_fire_tear_gas_at_residents#full

[9]

Definition of ’dixi’

dixiin British English

Latin (ˈdɪksɪ)EXCLAMATIONI have spoken
Dixi definition and meaning | Collins English Dictionary
Dixi definition and meaning | Collins English DictionaryDixi definition: I have spoken | Meaning, pronunciation, translations and examples

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Letter to CAF about their continuing involvement in the illegal Israeli settlements

Opgeslagen onder Divers

A Christmas Carol/Travel through the Night

A CHRISTMAS CAROL/TRAVEL THROUGH THE NIGHT 

Kerststal Kerststal — Stockvector

And again a Family finds is way, on the flight for hunger, war,hunger, persecution?Who will tell?And then THEY are the happy ones! 
How often does it occur, that families are torn apart, the man goes alone, parents lose their children during the flight.A woman loses her husband.Loosing everything they hold dear.
They have to leave their dwelling residence to be registeredsomewhere on the orders of a dictator, a foreign occupier, whodon’t give a f….ck abolut their conditions.
Whether they are rich or poor, healthy or sick.If the wife is pregnant or not.
You have to leaveOr else……
Rich people can find a shelter, but poor peoplemust try to survive.
And what if you are pregnant and poor?What if you are a Palestinian woman, standingby a checkpoint, in occupied territory, in needof delivery, at the mercy of the grace of occupyingsoldiers, of oppressors?
NOWHERE WELCOMENOWHERE ALLOWED
Untill someone pities you and givesyou permission to deliver your Baby in hisbasement.In his stable.
Does that sound familiar?
Christmas Tale is not about cosiness, Family Togethering, buying largeand expensive presents, although that is nice.
It,s about exclusion, It’s about people, who are welcomed nowhere, who are oppressed
Because of their:POVERTYRELIGIONDESCENTRACE
DO I KNOW?
Do I know, what nasty things people think of in theirblindness, xenophobia, hatred, obsession for money, greed, racism and antisemitism, to humiliate others.
I don”\t know, what ugly things occupiers invent, whether they areIsraeli [Palestine], Chinese [Tibet], Moroccon [Western Sahara], or else,to humiliate the occupied people?
What a US president invents to hold back desperate migrants.Children in cages?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_administration_family_separation_policy

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-10-27/presidential-immigration-debate-fact-check-and-who-built-the-cages

CHILDREN IN CAGESA CHILD BORN IN A STABLE
BOTH, NON WANTEDBOTH, NOT WELCOME
What atrocities are inventing by any dictator on this Planet?And don’t you forget their invisble Western and Chinese [and other]comrades in Evil, who want to flourish their multinationals indictatorial countries!
Christmas is all about exclusionBlocking people, who don’t have hope
AMSTERDAM
But let’s stay closer at home
Because it is the mayor of Amsterdam, and her predecessors,who left out in the cold those refugees, who couldn’t be deported,but yet had no rights, no shelter, no food.Refugees, who dwell in Amsterdam since 2012, year after year, withoutrights
https://wijzijnhier.org/who-we-are/

NOT WELCOMELIKE THE CHILD IN THE STABLE

CHRISTMAS/HOPE AND DESPAIR
Christmas is exclusion
But also the Unborn Child, on His Way with HisParents to Safety.
The Parents and the Unborn Child, they know aboutexclusion, being not welcome.Therefore they are in Solidarity with all opressed, discriminated, occupied, humiliated and torturedpeople of the Earth
The Child has come to this World to give them Hope
What are You doing, Reader?
GOOD CHRISTMAS DAYSWARM CHRISTMAS DAYS
Astrid Essed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBvkKGQ2ptU

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor A Christmas Carol/Travel through the Night

Opgeslagen onder Divers

Boycott Israel!/CAF transportsystem supports Israeli settlements and makes Blood Money!/Letter to CAF

BOYCOTT ISRAEL!/CAF TRANSPORTSYSTEM SUPPORTS ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS AND MAKES BLOOD MONEY!/LETTER TO CAF

  • A metro stop
  • CAFCreating rail solutions tailored to suit the needs of each and every customer.Front view of a high-speed train

CAF TRANSPORTSYSTEM, EARNING BLOOD MONEY BY SUPPORTING THEILLEGAL ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS
https://www.caf.net/en/compania/index.php

https://bdsmovement.net/boycott-caf
Image result for settlements/Images

ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS, ILLEGAL UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW

SEE FOR BACKGROUND INFORMATION
https://bdsmovement.net/boycott-caf

LETTER
TOCAF 
Director and ManagementSubject: Involvement with the illegal Israeli settlements

Dear Director,Dear Management,

Sometimes I ask myself, how on earth it is possible, that there arestill companies, that work with notorious thieves and villains likeoccupation countries, helping them with stealing and robbering!Alas I have learnt, that your company, the Basque Spanish multinational CAF [Construcciones Y Auxiliar de Ferocarilles], is notorious for that, sincein August 2019, a consortium, led by your CAF and the Israeli infrastructurecompany Shapir was selected by Israel’s finance ministry, to lead the expansionof the Jerusalem Light Rail, serving Israel’s illegal settlements in occupiedPalestinian territory. Look for all the information under note 1!
I think it is a shame and disgrace, that your company signed for openly violatingInternational Law and human rights!Your company must be  beaten virtually for this.
ISRAELI OCCUPATION
Although it should not be necessary, for your sake someinformation about the Israeli settlements.Of course you know about the now 53 years Israeli occupation of thePalestinian territories the West Bank, Eastern Jerusalem and Gaza [2],despite UN Security Resolution 242 [3] and all subsequent resolutions.As an occupation regime, Israel is responsible for and guilty ofstructural repression, human rights violations and systematic warcrimes [4] and crimes of humanity like ethnic cleansings. [5]
So even when there were no illegal settlements, you should notcooperate with the Israeli occupation State!

ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS
You know, or else you should know, that all Israeli settlements, built onthe occupied Palestinian territories are illegal according under International Law,according to article 49. 4th Geneva Convention, as the the Hague Convention. [6]
Not only this settlement building is pure land theft, not seldom the settlers [theIsraeli inhabitants of the illegal settlements] are very agressive towards theoccupied Palestinian population as the Israeli human rights organization Btselem mentions.[7]And the worst part is, that those agressive settlers are often supported by Israeli Security Forces! [8]

EPILOGUE
I have presented you with the facts.The facts you already knew, or should have known otherwise.I don’t know, what’s worse.

By leading the expansion of the Jerusalem Light Railand thus serving  Israel’s illegal settlements in occupied Palestinian territory, you are notonly tainted by your cooperation with a criminal occupation regime, alsoyou are complicit in landtheft and de fcato expulsion of the occupiedPalestinian population from their own ground.
Is that the way you earn your money.Your BLOODmoney?
Shame on you!

If you have any conscience and decency, withdraw from youractivities, helping the illegal settlements in occupied Palestinianterritory.Evil practices.
If not:
Then History will put you on the black list, ading war criminalsand criminals against humanity.
DIXI! [Latin: I have said, I have spoken] [9]

Kind greetings
Astrid Essed AmsterdamThe Netherlands

NOTES

[1]

WIKIPEDIAJERUSALEM LIGHT RAIL
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem_Light_Rail

INTERNATIONAL RAILWAY JOURNAL.COMCAF AND SHAPIR AWARDED JERUSALEM LIGHTRAIL PROJECT CONTRACT

TEXT

JERUSALEM Transportation Masterplan Team (JTMT) has awarded the TransJerusalem J-Net consortium, comprised of CAF and the construction firm Shapir, a €1.8bn contract to undertake an extension to the Jerusalem light rail network.

The Private-Public Partnership (PPP) includes the construction of 27km of new track, 53 new stations and various depots covering a 6.8km extension to the Red Line, and the new 20.6km Green Line. The Red Line is currently 13.8km long with 23 stations, and carries around 145,000 passengers daily.

The consortium will also design and supply 114 new Urbos LRVs for the Green Line, and the refurbishment of the 46 vehicles currently in service on the Red Line.

The contract includes the signalling, energy and communication systems, as well as the operation and maintenance of both lines for 15 and 25 years respectively, with the possibility of extending the term of operation.

CAF’s share of the contract is worth more than €500m, and includes the vehicle’s supply and refurbishment, signalling, energy and communication systems and project integration. CAF will also have a 50% stake in the Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) company that will manage the operation and maintenance of both lines, which is expected to have a €1bn turnover.

Construction is expected begin later this year with the new extensions fully operational by 2025.

Shikun & Binui and Egged (Israel), CRRC (China), Comsa (Spain), Efatec (Portugal) and MPK (Poland) also submitted bids for the contract.

END OF ARTICLE 

”Of the eight entities that participated in the preliminary stages, only two consortiums submitted bids in the final stage. The other consortium consisted in the companies Shikun & Binui and Egged (Israel), CRRC (China), Comsa (Spain), Efatec (Portugal) and MPK (Poland). Siemens, Alstom and Bombardier are reported to have left the tender process at an earlier stage. The companies did not officially withdraw from the process due to political reasons. Nevertheless, the light rail development in Jerusalem has been criticized in the past as both lines run through the disputed area of East Jerusalem”
URBAN TRANSPORT MAGAZINECAF-SAPHIR CONSORTIUM WINS JERUSALEM GEEN LINELIGHT RAIL TENDER

TEXT

The transport authority JTMT (Jerusalem Transportation Masterplan Team) has chosen the TransJerusalem J-Net Ltd consortium, consisting in the CAF Group and the construction firm Saphir, for the Jerusalem light rail project. The project value is 1.8 billion EUR.

The so-called Green line is a PPP (Private-Public Partnership) scheme and includes the construction of 20.6 kilometres of new track, 53 stations and a depot. Jerusalem opened its’ first light rail line, the red line in 2011. The new Green line uses the current Red Line on a stretch of 6.8 km. The contract also includes the design and supply of 114 low-floor Urbos trams (which will be operated as double-tractions) for the new Green Line and the refurbishment of the 46 units which are currently in service on the existing Red Line.

114 Urbos trams and 25 years of operation

The project scope of the consortium will also include the supply of the signalling, energy and communication systems, as well as the operation and maintenance of both lines for 15 and 25 years respectively, with the possibility of extending the term of operation. The CAF Group’s scope of this project exceeds 500 million EUR. The Group will also have a 50% stake in the company that will manage the operation and maintenance of both lines. The project is expected to be implemented this year with the new network fully operative by 2025.

The future network

The tram’s Red Line currently extends along 13.8 km with 23 stations distributed on the route, was inaugurated in 2011 and providing transport to over 145,000 passengers on average per day. The Green lines is expected to have a ridership of 200,000 passengers per day. It will link the two campuses of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and continue south via Pat junction to Gilo while using a common section with the Red line in the city centre until the terminus of the Tel Aviv – Jerusalem railway station which was inaugurated in 2018.

Of the eight entities that participated in the preliminary stages, only two consortiums submitted bids in the final stage. The other consortium consisted in the companies Shikun & Binui and Egged (Israel), CRRC (China), Comsa (Spain), Efatec (Portugal) and MPK (Poland). Siemens, Alstom and Bombardier are reported to have left the tender process at an earlier stage. The companies did not officially withdraw from the process due to political reasons. Nevertheless, the light rail development in Jerusalem has been criticized in the past as both lines run through the disputed area of East Jerusalem. 

END OF ARTICLEBDS MOVEMENTCAF/GET OF ISRAEL’S APARTHEID TRAIN

https://bdsmovement.net/boycott-caf

[2]
”Under the “disengagement” plan endorsed Tuesday by the Knesset, Israeli forces will keep control over Gaza’s borders, coastline and airspace, and will reserve the right to launch incursions at will. Israel will continue to wield overwhelming power over the territory’s economy and its access to trade.

“The removal of settlers and most military forces will not end Israel’s control over Gaza,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch’s Middle East and North Africa Division. “Israel plans to reconfigure its occupation of the territory, but it will remain an occupying power with responsibility for the welfare of the civilian population.”

HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH

ISRAEL: DISENGAGEMENT WILL NOT

END GAZA OCCUPATION

https://www.hrw.org/news/2004/10/28/israel-disengagement-will-not-end-gaza-occupation

TEXT

Israeli Government Still Holds Responsibility for Welfare of Civilians

The Israeli government’s plan to remove troops and Jewish settlements from the Gaza Strip would not end Israel’s occupation of the territory. As an occupying power, Israel will retain responsibility for the welfare of Gaza’s civilian population.

Under the “disengagement” plan endorsed Tuesday by the Knesset, Israeli forces will keep control over Gaza’s borders, coastline and airspace, and will reserve the right to launch incursions at will. Israel will continue to wield overwhelming power over the territory’s economy and its access to trade.

“The removal of settlers and most military forces will not end Israel’s control over Gaza,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch’s Middle East and North Africa Division. “Israel plans to reconfigure its occupation of the territory, but it will remain an occupying power with responsibility for the welfare of the civilian population.”

Under the plan, Israel is scheduled to remove settlers and military bases protecting the settlers from the Gaza Strip and four isolated West Bank Jewish settlements by the end of 2005. The Israeli military will remain deployed on Gaza’s southern border, and will reposition its forces to other areas just outside the territory.

In addition to controlling the borders, coastline and airspace, Israel will continue to control Gaza’s telecommunications, water, electricity and sewage networks, as well as the flow of people and goods into and out of the territory. Gaza will also continue to use Israeli currency.

A World Bank study on the economic effects of the plan determined that “disengagement” would ease restrictions on mobility inside Gaza. But the study also warned that the removal of troops and settlers would have little positive effect unless accompanied by an opening of Gaza’s borders. If the borders are sealed to labor and trade, the plan “would create worse hardship than is seen today.”

The plan also explicitly envisions continued home demolitions by the Israeli military to expand the “buffer zone” along the Gaza-Egypt border. According to a report released last week by Human Rights Watch, the Israeli military has illegally razed nearly 1,600 homes since 2000 to create this buffer zone, displacing some 16,000 Palestinians. Israeli officials have called for the buffer zone to be doubled, which would result in the destruction of one-third of the Rafah refugee camp.

In addition, the plan states that disengagement “will serve to dispel the claims regarding Israel’s responsibility for the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.” A report by legal experts from the Israeli Justice Ministry, Foreign Ministry and the military made public on Sunday, however, reportedly acknowledges that disengagement “does not necessarily exempt Israel from responsibility in the evacuated territories.”

If Israel removes its troops from Gaza, the Palestinian National Authority will maintain responsibility for security within the territory—to the extent that Israel allows Palestinian police the authority and capacity. Palestinian security forces will still have a duty to protect civilians within Gaza and to prevent indiscriminate attacks on Israeli civilians.

“Under international law, the test for determining whether an occupation exists is effective control by a hostile army, not the positioning of troops,” Whitson said. “Whether the Israeli army is inside Gaza or redeployed around its periphery and restricting entrance and exit, it remains in control.”

Under international law, the duties of an occupying power are detailed in the Fourth Geneva Convention and The Hague Regulations. According to The Hague Regulations, a “territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised.”

[3]

WIKIPEDIA

UNITED NATIONS SECURITY RESOLUTION 

242

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_242

[4]HUMAN RIGHTS WATCHRAIN OF FIRE: ISRAEL’S UNLAWFUL USE OF WHITE PHOSPHORUSIN GAZA
https://www.hrw.org/report/2009/03/25/rain-fire/israels-unlawful-use-white-phosphorus-gaza

HUMAN RIGHTS WATCHKILLING OF PALESTINIAN CIVILIANS DURING OPERATIONCAST LEAD
https://www.hrw.org/report/2009/08/13/white-flag-deaths/killings-palestinian-civilians-during-operation-cast-lead

”(Jerusalem) – At least 18 Israeli airstrikes during the fighting in Gaza in November 2012 were in apparent violation of the laws of war, Human Rights Watch said today after a detailed investigation into the attacks. These airstrikes killed at least 43 Palestinian civilians, including 12 children.”
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCHISRAEL: GAZA AIRSTRIKES VIOLATED LAWS OFWAR
https://www.hrw.org/news/2013/02/12/israel-gaza-airstrikes-violated-laws-war

AMNESTY INTERNATIONALA YEAR FROM DEADLY ISRAEL/GAZA CONFLICT, THE NIGHTMARE CONTINUES
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2013/11/year-deadly-israelgaza-conflict-nightmare-continues/

[5]

” Article 7 Crimes against humanity 1. For the purpose of this Statute, “crime against humanity” means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack: (a) Murder; (b) Extermination; (c) Enslavement; (d) Deportation or forcible transfer of population;

ROME STATUTE OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT

https://www.icc-cpi.int/resource-library/Documents/RS-Eng.pdf

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

ILLEGAL DEMOLITION AND FORICLE

TRANSFER OF BEDOUIN VILLAGE AMOUNTS 

TO WAR CRIME

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/06/israel-illegal-demolition-and-forcible-transfer-of-palestinian-bedouin-village-amounts-to-war-crime/
[6]
ILLEGALITY OF THE SETTLEMENTS

”Israel’s policy of settling its civilians in occupied Palestinian territory and displacing the local population contravenes fundamental rules of international humanitarian law.

Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention states: “The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.” It also prohibits the “individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory”. 

The extensive appropriation of land and the appropriation and destruction of property required to build and expand settlements also breach other rules of international humanitarian law. Under the Hague Regulations of 1907, the public property of the occupied population (such as lands, forests and agricultural estates) is subject to the laws of usufruct. This means that an occupying state is only allowed a very limited use of this property. This limitation is derived from the notion that occupation is temporary, the core idea of the law of occupation. In the words of the International Committee of the Red Cross, the occupying power “has a duty to ensure the protection, security, and welfare of the people living under occupation and to guarantee that they can live as normal a life as possible, in accordance with their own laws, culture, and traditions.”

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

CHAPTER 3: ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS AND INTERNATIONAL

LAW

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2019/01/chapter-3-israeli-settlements-and-international-law/

ARTICLE 49. 4TH GENEVA CONVENTION

ARTICLE 49 [ Link ]

Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive.
Nevertheless, the Occupying Power may undertake total or partial evacuation of a given area if the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand. Such evacuations may not involve the displacement of protected persons outside the bounds of the occupied territory except when for material reasons it is impossible to avoid such displacement. Persons thus evacuated shall be transferred back to their homes as soon as hostilities in the area in question have ceased.
The Occupying Power undertaking such transfers or evacuations shall ensure, to the greatest practicable extent, that proper accommodation is provided to receive the protected persons, that the removals are effected in satisfactory conditions of hygiene, health, safety and nutrition, and that members of the same family are not separated.
The Protecting Power shall be informed of any transfers and evacuations as soon as they have taken place.
The Occupying Power shall not detain protected persons in an area particularly exposed to the dangers of war unless the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand.
The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies. 

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/1a13044f3bbb5b8ec12563fb0066f226/523ba38706c71588c12563cd0042c407

THE HAGUE CONVENTION

ARTICLE 55

”Art. 55. The occupying State shall be regarded only as administrator and usufructuary of public buildings, real estate, forests, and agricultural estates belonging to the hostile State, and situated in the occupied country. It must safeguard the capital of these properties, and administer them in accordance with the rules of usufruct.

Treaties, States parties, and Commentaries – Hague Convention (IV) on War on Land and its Annexed Regulations, 1907 – –
Treaties, States parties, and Commentaries – Hague Convention (IV) on Wa…

[7]

BTSELEM.ORG

SETTLER VIOLENCE

https://www.btselem.org/topic/settler_violence

[8]

BTSELEM.ORG

ISRAELI SETTLERS STONE HOME IN BURIN, ESCORTED BY

SOLDIERS, WHO FIRE TEAR GAS AT RESIDENTS. CHILD FAINTS

FROM INHALATION

https://www.btselem.org/video/20201120_settlers_stone_homes_in_burin_and_soldiers_fire_tear_gas_at_residents#full

[9]

Definition of ’dixi’

dixiin British English

Latin (ˈdɪksɪ)EXCLAMATIONI have spoken
Dixi definition and meaning | Collins English Dictionary

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Boycott Israel!/CAF transportsystem supports Israeli settlements and makes Blood Money!/Letter to CAF

Opgeslagen onder Divers

Letter from David Ben Gurion to his son Amos, written 5 october 1937/About the ethnic cleansing of the ”Arabs” [Palestinians]

David Ben-Gurion (D597-087).jpg

Ben-Gurion in 19601st Prime Minister of Israel

Ben-Gurion in 1960
1st Prime Minister of Israel

ZIONIST LEADER AND LATER ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER DAVID BEN GURION, WHO ONESIDEDLY  DECLARED IN MAY, 1948  THE STATE OF ISRAEL  AND ONE OF THE ARCHITECTS OF THE ETHNIC CLEANSING OF PALESTINETHIS LETTER TO HIS SON ONLY SHOWS HIS PREPAREDNESS FOR ETHNIC CLEANSINGS, ALREADY IN 1937!
https://la.indymedia.org/news/2008/05/217559.php

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan_Dalet

ETNISCH GEZUIVERDE PALESTIJNEN IN 1948http://www.palestineremembered.com/Articles/General/Story1649.htmlhttp://la.indymedia.org/news/2007/06/201927.php

ETHNICALLY CLEANSED PALESTINIANS IN 1948
http://la.indymedia.org/news/2007/06/201927.php
https://www.astridessed.nl/letter-from-david-ben-gurion-to-his-son-amos-written-5-october-1937-about-the-ethnic-cleansing-of-the-arabs-palestinians/

‘ We must expel Arabs and take their place. Up to now, all our aspirations have been based on an assumption – one that has been vindicated throughout our activities in the country
– that there is enough room in the land for the Arabs and ourselves. But if we are compelled to use force – not in order to dispossess the Arabs of the Negev or Transjordan, but in order to guarantee our right to settle there – our force will enable us to do so. ”
AN EXCERPT FROM THE UNDERLYING LETTER, REVEALING THE LONG MADE ZIONIST PLAN TO ETNICALLY CLEANSE THE ”ARABS” [PALESTINIANS]……… 

THE LETTER

PALESTINA KOMITEELETTER FROM DAVID BEN GURION TO HIS SON AMOS, WRITTEN 5 OCTOBER 1937
Obtained from the Ben-Gurion Archives in Hebrew, and translated into English by the Institute of Palestine Studies, Beirut  

https://palestina-komitee.nl/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/70-Transfer-Ben-Gurion-Letter-to-his-Son-October-5-1937.pdf

Letter from David Ben-Gurion to his son Amos, written 5 October 1937
Obtained from the Ben-Gurion Archives in Hebrew, and translated into English
by the Institute of Palestine Studies, Beirut

5 October 1937
Dear Amos,

I was not angry at you, but I was very sorry indeed that there was no reply from you. I cannot accept the excuse that you have no time. I know you have a lot of work at school, in the field, and at home, and I am happy that you are so preoccupied with your studies. But it is always possible to find free time if necessary, not only on Sabbath days but even during weekdays. Your excuse that I keep moving from one country to another is not convincing. You can write to me in London. Here they [the Jewish Agency office] always know where I am, and they are efficient in forwarding my mail. As to the question of my membership in the executive committee [of the Jewish Agency], I shall explain to you in person if I meet you in Tel Aviv upon my return. Here what I want to talk about is the conflict you are experiencing between your reason and your emotions with regard to the question of the state. Political matters should not be a question of emotions. The only thing that should be taken into account is what we want and what is best for us, what will lead to the objective, and which are the policies that will make us succeed and which will make us fail.

It seems to me that I, too, have “emotions” [quotation marks in original.Hebrew: regesh]. Without these emotions I would not have been able to endure decades of our hard work. It definitely does not hurt my feelings [regesh] that a state is established, even if it is small.

Of course the partition of the country gives me no pleasure. But the country that they [the Royal (Peel) Commission] are partitioning is not in our actual possession; it is in the possession of the Arabs and the English. What is in our actual possession is a small portion, less than what they [the Peel Commission] are proposing for a Jewish state. If I were an Arab I would have been very indignant. But in this proposed partition we will get more than what we already have, though of course much less than we merit and desire. The question is: would we obtain more without partition? If things were to remain as they are [emphasis in original], would this satisfy our feelings? What we really want is not that the land remain whole and unified. What we want is that the whole and unified land be Jewish [emphasis original]. A unified Eretz Israeli would be no source of satisfaction for me–if it were Arab.

From our standpoint, the status quo is deadly poison. We want to change the status quo [emphasis original]. But how can this change come about? How can this land become ours? The decisive question is: Does the establishment of a Jewish state [in only part of Palestine] advance or retard the conversion of this country into a Jewish country?

My assumption (which is why I am a fervent proponent of a state, even though it is now linked to partition) is that a Jewish state on only part of the land is not the end but the beginning.

When we acquire one thousand or 10,000 dunams, we feel elated. It does not hurt our feelings that by this acquisition we are not in possession of the whole land. This is because this increase in possession is of consequence not only in itself, but because through it we increase our strength, and every increase in strength helps in the possession of the land as a whole. The establishment of a state, even if only on a portion of the land, is the maximal reinforcement of our strength at the present time and a powerful boost to our historical endeavors to liberate the entire country.

We shall admit into the state all the Jews we can. We firmly believe that we can admit more than two million Jews. We shall build a multi-faceted Jewish economy– agricultural, industrial, and maritime. We shall organize an advanced defense force—a superior army which I have no doubt will be one of the best armies in the world. At that point I am confident that we would not fail in settling in the remaining parts of the country, through agreement and understanding with our Arab neighbors, or through some other means.

We must always keep in mind the fundamental truths that make our settlement of this land imperative and possible. They are two or three: it is not the British Mandate nor the Balfour Declaration. These are consequences, not causes. They are the products of coincidence: contingent, ephemeral, and they will come to an end. They were not inevitable. They could not have occurred but for the World War, or rather, they would not have occurred if the war had not ended the way it did.

But on the other hand there are fundamental [emphasis original] historical truths, unalterable as long as Zionism is not fully realized. These are:

1) The pressure of the Exile, which continues to push the Jews with propulsive force towards the country
2) Palestine is grossly under populated. It contains vast colonization potential which the Arabs neither need nor are qualified (because of their lack of need) to exploit. There is no Arab immigration problem. There is no Arab exile. Arabs are not persecuted. They have a homeland, and it is vast.
3) The innovative talents of the Jews (a consequence of point 1 above), their ability to make the desert bloom, to create industry, to build an economy, to develop culture, to conquer the sea and space with the help of science and pioneering endeavor.

These three fundamental truths will be reinforced by the existence of a Jewish state in a part of the country, just as Zionism will be reinforced by every conquest, large or small, every school, every factory, every Jewish ship, etc.

Our ability to penetrate the country will increase if we have a state. Our strength vis-à-vis the Arabs will likewise increase. The possibilities for construction and multiplication will speedily expand. The greater the Jewish strength in the country, the more the Arabs will realize that it is neither beneficial nor possible for them to withstand us. On the contrary, it will be possible for the Arabs to benefit enormously from the Jews, not only materially but politically as well.

I do not dream of war nor do I like it. But I still believe, more than I did before the emergence of the possibility of a Jewish state, that once we are numerous and powerful in the country the Arabs will realize that it is better for them to become our allies.

They will derive benefits from our assistance if they, of their own free will, give us the opportunity to settle in all parts of the country. The Arabs have many countries that are under-populated, underdeveloped, and vulnerable, incapable with their own strength to stand up to their external enemies. Without France, Syria could not last for one day against an onslaught from Turkey. The same applies to Iraq and to the new [Palestinian] state [under the Peel plan]. All of these stand in need of the protection of France or Britain. This need for protection means subjugation and dependence on the other. But the Jews could be equal allies, real friends, not occupiers or tyrants over them.

Let us assume that the Negev will not be allotted to the Jewish state. In such event, the Negev will remain barren because the Arabs have neither the competence nor the need to develop it or make it prosper. They already have an abundance of deserts but not of manpower, financial resources, or creative initiative. It is very probable that they will agree that we undertake the development of the Negev and make it prosper in return for our financial, military, organizational, and scientific assistance. It is also possible that they will not agree. People don’t always behave according to logic, common sense, or their own practical advantage. Just as you yourself are sometimes split conflicted between your mind and your emotions, it is possible that the Arabs will follow the dictates of sterile nationalist emotions and tell us: “We want neither your honey nor your sting. We’d rather that the Negev remain barren than that Jews should inhabit it.” If this occurs, we will have to talk to them in a different language—and we will have a different language—but such a language will not be ours without a state. This is so because we can no longer tolerate that vast territories capable of absorbing tens of thousands of Jews should remain vacant, and that Jews cannot return to their homeland because the Arabs prefer that the place [the Negev] remains neither ours nor theirs. We must expel Arabs and take their place. Up to now, all our aspirations have been based on an assumption – one that has been vindicated throughout our activities in the country
– that there is enough room in the land for the Arabs and ourselves. But if we are compelled to use force – not in order to dispossess the Arabs of the Negev or Transjordan, but in order to guarantee our right to settle there – our force will enable us to do so.

Clearly in such event we will have to deal not only with the Arabs living in Eretz Israel, since it is very probable that Arabs from the neighboring countries will come to their aid. But our power will be greater, not only because we will be better organized and equipped, but also because behind us stands a force still greater in quantity and quality. This is the reservoir of the millions in the Diaspora. Our entire younger generation of Poland, Romania, America, and other countries will rush to our aid at the outbreak of such a conflict. I pray to God that this does not happen at all. Nevertheless the Jewish state will not rely only on the Jews living in it, but on the Jewish people living in every corner of the world: the many millions who are eager and obliged [emphasis original] to settle in Palestine. There are not millions of Arabs who are compelled or willing to settle in Palestine. Of course it is likely that Arab adventurers and gangs will come from Syria or Iraq or other Arab countries, but these can be no match for the tens and hundreds of thousands of young Jews to whom Eretz Israel is not merely an emotional issue, but one that is in equal measure both personal and national.

For this reason I attach enormous importance to the conquest of the sea and the construction of a Jewish harbor and a Jewish fleet. The sea is the bridge between the Jews of this country and the Jewish Diaspora – the millions of Jews in different parts of the world. We must create the conditions that will enable us in times of necessity to bring into the country in our own ships manned by our own seamen, tens of thousands of young men. Meanwhile we must prepare these young men while they are still in the Diaspora for whatever task awaits them here.

I am confident that the establishment of a Jewish state, even if it is only in a part of the country, will enable us to carry out this task. Once a state is established, we shall have control over the Eretz Israeli sea. Our activities in the sea will then include astonishing achievements.

Because of all the above, I feel no conflict between my mind and emotions. Both declare to me: A Jewish state must be established immediately, even if it is only in part of the country. The rest will follow in the course of time. A Jewish state will come.

My warm greetings [Hebrew: Shalom Rav].

When do you return to Kadoorie [agricultural school]? Write to me. Show this letter to your mother and sisters.

Sincerely,
Your father

END OF THE LETTER

SEE ALSO
JEWISH VOICE FOR PEACEBEN GURION: LETTER TO HIS SON, OCTOBER 5, 1937

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Letter from David Ben Gurion to his son Amos, written 5 october 1937/About the ethnic cleansing of the ”Arabs” [Palestinians]

Opgeslagen onder Divers

US airstrike kills top Iran general, Qassem Soleimani at Baghdad Airport/US liquidation of Iran’s general Soleimani is state terrorism

DAUGHTER OF LIQUIDATED GENERAL SOLEIMANI

US AIRSTRIKE KILLS TOP IRAN GENERAL, QASSEM SOLEIMANI AT BAGHDAD AIRPORT/US LIQUIDATION OF IRAN’S GENERAL SOLEIMANI IS STATE TERRORISM
INTRODUCTION:
Again, dear readers, wishing you a Happy, Healthy and Prosperous New Year!
https://www.astridessed.nl/happy-new-year-6/

Unfortunately however, the New Year did not start peacefully, with the US liquidation of Iran’s general Soleimani [1], being an extrajudicial execution and adding to the many crimes of Superpower USA. 
Besides:What is there to be expected from rogue president Trump, who makes is as a sport to violate International Law? [2]Also it is an utter scandal, that the Dutch government, which is bound to promote the International Legal Order [article 90, Dutch Constitution] [3], has declared, in the words of the Dutch minister of Defense, mrs Bijleveld, to ”understand” the liquidation of Iran’s general Soleimani! [4]I will write them about that, but that’s another story.
Back to USA/Trump:
Your Avenger of injustice would not have been your Avenger of injustice, if she would not have taken action:
This time by a Letter to the Editor, which I have sent to a number of American, British and other international papers.I did the same with a Dutch Letter to the Editor, sending it to Dutch and Belgian newspapers.
Since I, of course, don’t know, whether it is published at all, hereby I share the Letter with you.
See firstly the Letter,Then, below, the notes, belonging to this Introduction piece.
ENJOY READING!

Astrid EssedAmsterdam

A

LETTER TO THE EDITOR, SENT TO AMERICAN, BRITISH AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL NEWSPAPERS:

US LIQUIDATION OF IRAN’S GENERAL SOLEIMANI IS STATE TERRORISM
Letter to the Editor

Dear Editor,

Unfortunately, this New Year has begun far from peaceful with ”thanks” to the US liquidation of Iran’s general Soleimani on the orders of president Trump.This liquidation is an act of war against Iran and will have dangerous consequences with very probably as main victims Iranian and Iraqi civilians, but also it endangers the chances of terrorist attacks, as in the USA as in countrieswhich agree with this insane Trump adventurism. But there is more:This liquidation of general Soleimani with six other victims like  a high profile Iraqi military is a serious violation of International Law.To say it like it is:The USA is not at war with Iran [in which case Soleimani, as a combatant, would have been a ”legitimate” target], neither Soleimani launched an attack on American territory.And since there was no proof whatsoever of an ”imminent threat” [apart from not proven allegations of Trump] this is an assassination maffia style.Because rocket attacks on political enemies, also called ”extrajudicial executions” are a flagrant violations of the right to life, as the right to a fair and independent trial.And I am not alone in this:Recently Agnes Callamard, UN Special Reporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions has criticized the liquidation as illegal and contrary with International Law.Now I certainly am no adherent of the Iran regime, because of its systematic violations of human rights, neither of the role of mr Soleimani [being a strong supporter of the Syrian dictator Assad], but human rights are human rights, regardless, and the liquidation of human being without any trial is illegal.Therefore it is a shame, that the Dutch government has declared to ”understand” the Soleimani liquidation and it only shows, how little respect this Rutte III Dutch government has for the International Law that she is obliged to advance, according to article 90, Dutch Constitution.

Astrid EssedAmsterdamThe Netherlands

B

NOTES, BELONGING TO ”INTRODUCTION”

[1]
NBC NEWSUS AIRSTRIKE KILLS TOP IRAN GENERAL, QASSEM SOLEIMANI AT BAGHDAD AIRPORT  
4 JANUARY 2020
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/airstrike-kills-top-iran-general-qassim-suleimani-baghdad-airport-iraqi-n1109821

[2]

TWO EXAMPLES OF PRESIDENT TRUMP, VIOLATING INTERNATIONAL LAW

FIRST EXAMPLE
A
BBCJERUSALEM IS ISRAEL’S CAPITAL, SAYS DONALD TRUMP6 DECEMBER 2017
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42259443

THIS TRUMP STRAPATZ IS IN  VIOLATION WITH UN SECURITY RESOLUTION 478

WIKIPEDIA

UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 478

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_478

FULL TEXT RESOLUTION

The Security Council,

Recalling its resolution 476 (1980),

Reaffirming again that the acquisition of territory by force is inadmissible,

Deeply concerned over the enactment of a “basic law” in the Israeli Knesset proclaiming a change in the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem, with its implications for peace and security,

Noting that Israel has not complied with resolution 476 (1980),

Reaffirming its determination to examine practical ways and means, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, to secure the full implementation of its resolution 476 (1980), in the event of non-compliance by Israel,

1. Censures in the strongest terms the enactment by Israel of the “basic law” on Jerusalem and the refusal to comply with relevant Security Council resolutions;

2. Affirms that the enactment of the “basic law” by Israel constitutes a violation of international law and does not affect the continued application of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since June 1967, including Jerusalem;

3. Determines that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power, which have altered or purport to alter the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem, and in particular the recent “basic law” on Jerusalem, are null and void and must be rescinded forthwith;

4. Affirms also that this action constitutes a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East;

5. Decides not to recognize the “basic law” and such other actions by Israel that, as a result of this law, seek to alter the character and status of Jerusalem and calls upon:

(a) All Member States to accept this decision;

(b) Those States that have established diplomatic missions at Jerusalem to withdraw such missions from the Holy City;

6. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Security Council on the implementation of the present resolution before 15 November 1980;7. Decides to remain seized of this serious situation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_478#Full_text_of_Resolution_478

SEE ALSO

https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/%7B65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/IP%20SRES%20478.pdf

SECOND EXAMPLE

B

BBC

US SAYS ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS ARE NO LONGER ILLEGAL

18 NOVEMBER 2019

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-50468025

THIS SECOND TRUMP STRAPATZ IS A FLAGRANT VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, DECLARING ALL ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS IN THE OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES ILLEGAL 

THE ILLEGALITY OF THE ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS

THIS IS WHAT INTERNATIONAL LAW SAYS

”The Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits an occupying power from transferring citizens from its own territory to the occupied territory (Article 49).

The Hague Regulations prohibit an occupying power from undertaking permanent changes in the occupied area unless these are due to military needs in the narrow sense of the term, or unless they are undertaken for the benefit of the local population.”

BTSELEM.ORG

SETTLEMENTS

https://www.btselem.org/ settlements

”Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive.”

ARTICLE 49, FOURTH GENEVA CONVENTION

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/Article.xsp?action=openDocument&documentId=77068F12B8857C4DC12563CD0051BDB0

SEE ALSO

FOURTH GENEVA CONVENTION:

CONVENTION (IV)  RELATIVE TO THE PROTECTION OF

CIVILIAN PERSONS IN TIME OF WAR, GENEVA, 12 AUGUST 1949

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/Treaty.xsp?documentId=AE2D398352C5B028C12563CD002D6B5C&action=openDocument

THE HAGUE CONVENTION 1907

https://www.loc.gov/law/help/us-treaties/bevans/m-ust000001-0631.pdf

[3]

DUTCH CONSTITUTION

ARTICLE 90

The Government shall promote the development of the international legal order

https://www.rechtspraak.nl/SiteCollectionDocuments/Constitution-NL.pdf  [4]

DUTCH REVIEWDUTCH GOVERNMENT ”UNDERSTANDS” US ASSISSINATION OF SOLEIMANI, BUT WANTS FURTHER EXPLANATION

On the TV program Op1, Dutch Defense Minister, Bijleveld, says she understands why the US killed Soleimani and nodded to the awful atrocities Iran is responsible for, NOS reports. Nonetheless, the Netherlands, as a member of NATO, is focussed on de-escalation. 

“A real crook”

Bijleveld described Soleimani as “a real crook” and discussed his involvement in the war in Syria as commander of the Quds Force.But she went on to acknowledge that the assassination of the leader created “a very fragile situation” and emphasised that NATO members are well aware of the potential retaliation from Iran.

Must focus on de-escalation

However, the minister said the Dutch government are focussed on de-escalation. Bijleveld referred to statements made by Stoltenberg, the secretary of NATO, who also stressed the drone strike was a decision made solely by the US and is not endorsed by NATO.

The Netherlands wants explanation from United States Government

Bijleveld believes the Netherlands and other countries should have been informed of the attack before it happened.

The Netherlands wants the United States to provide a “legal basis” for such a major decision. The US claim the attack on the Iranian general was “self-defense”.

In a letter sent to the House of Representatives, the cabinet says the Netherlands “will underline Iran’s negative influence on regional stability and point out the importance of Iraq’s sovereignty and territorial integrity” during the upcoming meeting between EU foreign leaders scheduled for Friday.

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor US airstrike kills top Iran general, Qassem Soleimani at Baghdad Airport/US liquidation of Iran’s general Soleimani is state terrorism

Opgeslagen onder Divers

Woman shot and killed by police officer in her own home/Police violence in the USA/Another innocent victim

WOMAN SHOT AND KILLED BY POLICE OFFICER IN HER OWN HOME/POLICE VIOLENCE IN THE USA!/ANOTHER INNOCENT VICTIM 

A makeshift memorial outside the home of Atatiana Jefferson on Monday. Jefferson was fatally shot by a Fort Worth police officer early Saturday morning. (Jake Bleiberg/AP)

A makeshift memorial outside the home of Atatiana Jefferson on Monday. Jefferson was fatally shot by a Fort Worth police officer early Saturday morning. (Jake Bleiberg/AP)

View image on Twitter

ATATIANA JEFFERSONONE OF THE COUNTLESS VICTIMS OF US POLICE BRUTALITYATATIANA JEFFERSON, REST IN PEACE

Aaron Y. Dean

Aaron Y. DeanCreditTarrant County Sheriff’s Office

AARON Y DEAN, THE POLICE OFFICER, WHO SHOT AND KILLED ATATIANA JEFFERSON

” Oscar’s killing is personal because his death offends the fundamental principles of justice, every notion of dignity and the idea that through those threads, all of our lives are connected.  As human beings, we are responsible for each other.  His death means that we must work for his justice. ”
ABOUT OSCAR GRANT, ANOTHER BLACK VICTIM OF US POLICE BRUTALITY
https://www.amnestyusa.org/another-year-another-unarmed-black-man-killed-by-police/

Police violence in the USA [1] is very depressing and not only shows an amount of deep structural racism [most victims are black men and sometimes blach women too], but also the insane trigger happiness of many policemen.As I say, not only black people are being deadly shot, white people too [2]But the problem is that reading the percentage of victims, black people are over representated.According to Amnesty International five times more than white people! [3]And almost in the most cases the same story:Police officers are confronted with black men, who are deadly shot, because the police officer tought they were wearing a gun, while in reality it was something innocent like a  mobile phone…………[4]This can happen once, or two times, but when it happens each time again [while the police officer is heavily armed and can easily defend himself] it is no ”incident” anymore, but a form of racism, whether it is conscious or subconscious.It happens too many times!Besides:Investigations show, that there is a disproportionate fear to see criminality in black people, especially tall black men and black men in general [5]There are so many examples of police violence against black people!See under note 6Depressing and good, that movements like”Black lives matter” [7] is protesting continually.

STUDIES ABOUT POLICE BRUTA;ITY AGAINST BLACK PEOPLE
Police brutality against black people is widely acknowledged:Firstly by the facts we see in the news.But the amount of police brutality against black people is shocking in this time, this century, this period:
Amnesty International speaks for black Americans as five times likely to be shot as unarmed whote Americans
I quote Amnesty International USA
and unarmed black Americans are five times as likely as unarmed white Americans to be shot and killed by police officers.” [8]
By the way, about USA police trigger happiness:Amnesty International USA also writes:
Hundreds of people are killed by police every year in the United States.’ [9]
According to the Washington Post, in 2016, 962 people were killed by the police [10], in 2019, 717 people so far [11]
That’s a lot of people.
ABOUT BLACK PEOPLE:

A recent study reveals, that about 1 in 1,000 black men and boys in America can expect to die at the hands of police [12]That makes them 2.5 times more likely than white men and boys to die during an encounter with cops…..[13]
The analysis also showed that Latino men and boys, black women and girls and Native American men, women and children are also killed by police at higher rates than their white peers. But the vulnerability of black males was particularly striking. [14]
THE BLACK WOMAN, WHO WAS SHOT AND KILLED IN HER OWN HOME
The reason I wrote this piece in particular is the following shocking incident:
In the early morning on saturday 12 october 2019 an 28 year old black woman,Atatiana Jefferson, was shot and killed in her own home by a white Fort Worth police officer [in Texas] [15]In her own home.As newssources say:In her own bedroom! [16]Police arrived at her home after a neighbor called a non-emergency number, stating that Jefferson’s front door was open.[2] Police body camera footage showed that when she came to her window to observe police outside her home, Officer Aaron Dean shot through it and killed her. [17]And now the most shocking point:The policeman didn’t identify himself as a policeman [18], just shouted orders and shot immediately, not giving the woman even the chance to respond to his orders.Youtube films give evidence to that.You hear a shouting order, then a shot……[19]WELL, readers, here was no supposed black criminal, no alleged gun, that was pulled, only an unarmed woman in her home, who was shot…….Because I don’t believe the cop’s story, that she had a gun, that she pointed out on the officer, based allegedly on the statement of her nephew, a child of 8 years old! [20]Besides this statement of an 8 years old had been debunked!I quote the New York Times:”A gun was found on the floor of Ms. Jefferson’s bedroom near the window. When Ms. Jefferson heard noises coming from outside, she had taken a handgun from her purse and pointed it toward the window, her 8-year-old nephew told officials, according to an arrest warrant released on Tuesday.

But the other officer who responded with Mr. Dean said she could only see Ms. Jefferson’s face through the window when Mr. Dean fired, according to the warrant, and Chief Kraus has defended her right to have a gun in her own home.” [21]And even IF she had a gun in her home, what seemed to be the case [22] since when that is a problem?According to the second amendment of the USA constitution [23] any American inhabitant has the right to bear a weapon!Besides, even the police chief, Kraus, had defended her right to have a gun on her home! [24]
Is it not shocking, readers, that a person is not safe in his or her own house?
With right the NAACP [25] gave the following statement:
”UNACCEPTABLE! The acts of yet another “trained” police officer have resulted in the death of #AtatianaJefferson. Gun downed in her own home. If we are not safe to call the police, if we are not safe in our homes, where can we find peace? We demand answers. We demand justice.” [26]

CHARGED WITH MURDER
End now, the good news is, that Aaron Y Deal, the white police officer, who shot Atatiana Jefferson in her own home, is being charged for murder. [27]
I personally wonder whether the cop really is going to be convicted, but if he is, I don’t hope it is such a mockery of justice, like in a similar case, shortly ago, in which a white female police officer shot a black man, Botham Jean, in his own home, pretending [I don’t believe her] that she believed it was her own apartment and that Jean was a burglar [as if it is justified to shoot and kill any burglar, who comes in your home, but that’s apart from this] [28]She was merely convicted to ten years prison. [29]
A mockery of justice, according to me and many others.
But in the Netherlands it is not at all different:
In 2013 a Dutch police officer, who shot the 17 years old Rishi Chadrikasing [from Surinamese-Indian descent], who was running away [the officer wrongly stated that Rishi was a ”treath” to him, despite the fact, that he was running away!], was acquitted for fatlly shooting Chadrikasing.I called the sentence ”license to kill” [30]

EPILOGUE
The police killing of the innocent Atatiana Jefferson, in her own home, shows another day in hell for black people in the USA.Because they are not safe!Black men bear the greatest risks-being seen as dangerous, even when they only show their ID, it mysteriously changes in a gun-but also black women are not safe, even not in their own home.And the fact that a female police officer kills a black man in his own home, telling a nonsense story, that she thought it was her own home and is only convicted to ten years prison [31], just shows how sick the American society still is!

Reason for me to write this piece [see also my comment on ABC News below].And in memory to Atatiana Jefferson and all black and other people, who were victims of police killings.
But we are determined to fight on.Untill Justice is done!
NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE!

Astrid EssedAmsterdam

MY COMMENT ON ABC NEWS

ABC NEWSTEXAS COP NEVER IDENTIFIED HIMSELF AS POLICE BEFORE FATALLY SHOOTING ATATIANA JEFFERSON IN HER OWN HOME: OFFICIAL13 OCTOBER 2019

https://abcnews.go.com/US/officer-bodycam-shooting-killing-woman-home/story?id=66237208

Astrid Essed • a few seconds agoHold on, this is waiting to be approved by ABC News.

HORRIBLE!
Though I don’t know the facts yet, it seems to me like an extrajudicial ezxecution!
Not only clearly the policeman did not identify himself as police, or shouting ”police” [he has to show his card too], even if he did, and it was a situation which required shooting, he still had the obligation to shoot in the air first [if there was no imminent threath and then on a less vulnerable part of her body!
Police violence against black people in the US is shocking.
Mostly is the excuse, that the person ”bearec arms” and to see later it was just a mobile or identity card he wanted to show!
But also white people are subject to police violence.
So in general:
Not only racism, but also trigger happy behaviour is the root of many police deaths.
THIS HAS TO BE STOPPED!/RIGHT NOW!/https://www.astridessed.nl/…
Astrid Essed

NOTES

[1]

WIKIPEDIAPOLICE BRUTALITY IN THE UNITED STATES
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_brutality_in_the_United_States

BRITANNICA.COMPOLICE BRUTALITY IN THE UNITED STATES
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Police-Brutality-in-the-United-States-2064580
BRITANNICA.COM
AFRICAN AMERICANS AND POLICE BRUTALITY
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Police-Brutality-in-the-United-States-2064580#ref334676

ORIGINAL SOURCE
BRITANNICA.COMPOLICE BRUTALITY IN THE UNITED STATES
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Police-Brutality-in-the-United-States-2064580

[2]
”In the U.S., African Americans are 2.5 times more likely to be killed by police than white people. For black women, the rate is 1.4 times more likely.”
CITYLAB.COMWHAT NEW RESEARCH SAYS ABOUT RACE AND POLICE SHOOTINGS6 AUGUST 2019
https://www.citylab.com/equity/2019/08/police-officer-shootings-gun-violence-racial-bias-crime-data/595528/

[3]

Hundreds of people are killed by police every year in the United States. According to The Washington Post, 963 people were killed by police in 2016 alone, and unarmed black Americans are five times as likely as unarmed white Americans to be shot and killed by police officers.”

AMNESTY INTERNATIONALDEADLY FORCE AND POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY
https://www.amnestyusa.org/issues/deadly-force-police-accountability/

We all have the human right to live and to be safe, secure, and treated equally.These fundamental human rights are violated when police can kill people without justification or accountability – and that’s why Amnesty International is working to enact standards and safeguards to protect everyone.THE PROBLEMPOLICE USE OF LETHAL FORCEHundreds of people are killed by police every year in the United States. According to The Washington Post, 963 people were killed by police in 2016 alone, and unarmed black Americans are five times as likely as unarmed white Americans to be shot and killed by police officers.Nobody really knows how many people are shot and killed by police officers because the federal government does not collect this data.LACK OF STANDARDSSeveral fundamental human rights are involved when police use lethal force: the rights to life, security of the person, freedom from discrimination, and equal protection under the law. The United States has a legal obligation to protect these rights, and has entered international agreements promising to protect them. International law only allows police officers to use lethal force as a last resort to protect themselves or others from death or serious injury.In 2015, Amnesty International issued a groundbreaking report that found that all 50 states and the District of Columbia failed to comply with international law and standards on the use of lethal force by police. There are not adequate laws on the books to prevent unlawful use of lethal force or to hold police accountable for using it.


END OF THE AMNESTY ARTICLE

In the U.S., African Americans are 2.5 times more likely to be killed by police than white people. For black women, the rate is 1.4 times more likely.”CITYLAB.COMWHAT NEW RESEARCH SAYS ABOUT RACE AND POLICE SHOOTINGS6 AUGUST 2019
https://www.citylab.com/equity/2019/08/police-officer-shootings-gun-violence-racial-bias-crime-data/595528/

Two new studies have revived the long-running debate over how police respond to white criminal suspects versus African Americans.

In the U.S., African Americans are 2.5 times more likely to be killed by police than white people. For black women, the rate is 1.4 times more likely.

That’s according to a new study conducted by Frank Edwards, of Rutgers University’s School of Criminal Justice, Hedwig Lee, of Washington University in St. Louis’s Department of Sociology, and Michael Esposito, of the University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research. The researchers used verified data on police killings from 2013 to 2018 compiled by the website Fatal Encounters, created by Nevada-based journalist D. Brian Burghart. Under their models, they found that roughly 1-in-1,000 black boys and men will be killed by police in their lifetime. For white boys and men, the rate is 39 out of 100,000.

In fact, people of color in general were found more likely to be killed by police than their white counterparts. 

The study was published on Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, or PNAS, a journal that recently drew controversy for publishing another study on police killing disparities. That study, led by Michigan State University psychology professor Joseph Cesario, published on July 22, found that violent crime rates and the racial demographics of a given location are better indicators for determining a police killing victim’s race.

As Cesario explained in a press release:

Many people ask whether black or white citizens are more likely to be shot and why. If you live in a county that has a lot of white people committing crimes, white people are more likely to be shot. If you live in a county that has a lot of black people committing crimes, black people are more likely to be shot.

The two studies are just the latest salvos in a long-running debate over whether police violence towards African Americans is better explained because of racial prejudice or because black people are really violent enough to justify extra police force. The Cesario study, with its focus on crime rates, seems to fall in the latter camp. Both rely on media-generated police shootings data—Cesario’s uses databases produced by The Washington Post and The Guardian.

Several academics have challenged Cesario’s methodology, namely his decision to “sidestep the benchmark” of using population to calculate racial disparity. It has been questioned whether using population is an appropriate benchmark in these kinds of analyses: Critics of this technique believe that population-benchmarking is flawed because it assumes black and white people have an equal likelihood of encountering police. (An example of population-benchmarking is, as Cesario’s study explains, stating: “26% of civilians killed by police shootings in 2015 were Black even though Black civilians comprise only 12% of the U.S. population. According to this 12% benchmark, more Black civilians are fatally shot than we would expect, indicating disparity.”)

The study was published on Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, or PNAS, a journal that recently drew controversy for publishing another study on police killing disparities. That study, led by Michigan State University psychology professor Joseph Cesario, published on July 22, found that violent crime rates and the racial demographics of a given location are better indicators for determining a police killing victim’s race.

As Cesario explained in a press release:

Many people ask whether black or white citizens are more likely to be shot and why. If you live in a county that has a lot of white people committing crimes, white people are more likely to be shot. If you live in a county that has a lot of black people committing crimes, black people are more likely to be shot.

The two studies are just the latest salvos in a long-running debate over whether police violence towards African Americans is better explained because of racial prejudice or because black people are really violent enough to justify extra police force. The Cesario study, with its focus on crime rates, seems to fall in the latter camp. Both rely on media-generated police shootings data—Cesario’s uses databases produced by The Washington Post and The Guardian.

Several academics have challenged Cesario’s methodology, namely his decision to “sidestep the benchmark” of using population to calculate racial disparity. It has been questioned whether using population is an appropriate benchmark in these kinds of analyses: Critics of this technique believe that population-benchmarking is flawed because it assumes black and white people have an equal likelihood of encountering police. (An example of population-benchmarking is, as Cesario’s study explains, stating: “26% of civilians killed by police shootings in 2015 were Black even though Black civilians comprise only 12% of the U.S. population. According to this 12% benchmark, more Black civilians are fatally shot than we would expect, indicating disparity.”)Instead of using population, Cesario analyzed variables such as the race of the police officers, crime rates, and the racial demographics of locations where police shootings happened in 2015. From that, he derived that black and Latino victims of police killings were more likely to have been shot by black and Latino cops, and that ”might not be due to bias on the part of Black or Hispanic officers, but instead to simple overlap between officer and county demographics.” The problem with this, as Princeton professor Jonathan Mummolo, explained on Twitter, is that it still rests on the assumption that black and white officers encounter black civilians in equal numbers, or in even temperaments—which they don’t.

The problem with this, as Princeton professor Jonathan Mummolo, explained on Twitter, is that it still rests on the assumption that black and white officers encounter black civilians in equal numbers, or in even temperaments—which they don’t

What do the recent mass shootings tell us, if anything, about this?

There’s also something to be said for what the victims were doing when the cops shot them. Cesario points out that, “The vast majority—between 90 percent and 95 percent—of the civilians shot by officers were actively attacking police or other citizens when they were shot”—and that there were more white civilians who were committing such attacks when police killed them than were African Americans. In fact, white people were more likely to be armed when police killed them, as Cesario’s study acknowledges—“if anything, [we] found anti-White disparities when controlling for race-specific crime,” reads the study.

The three most recent mass shootings—in Gilroy, California; Dayton, Ohio; and El Paso, Texas—represent extreme examples of armed white men on the attack, but looking at them through the lens of Cesario’s findings is still revealing. Police shot two of the perpetrators, killing one of them. Connor Betts, the shooter who killed nine people and injured 27 more on August 4 in Dayton, was stopped by police bullets less than a minute after his attack began. Police fired at the Gilroy shooter, Santino Legan, but he ultimately succumbed to self-inflicted wounds. Patrick Crusius was arrested “without incident” after killing 22 people and injuring dozens more in El Paso.

In only one of these cases did police actually shoot and kill an armed white suspect who was on the attack: Betts in Dayton. Even that case is murky, though. Betts wore a mask, hearing protection, and body armor—his race was likely not apparent from a distance, and the entire melee happened very quickly. But even if one interprets the fact that police shot at two of those three shooters as evidence of the “anti-White disparity” Cesario mentions, one could also argue that it takes whites committing large-scale acts of terror with automatic weapons for police to respond in the same way that police have responded to, say, a teenager walking away-from-police-while-black.  

The limitations of the data

Another way to determine whether racial bias is a factor is by examining police behavior when their target is unarmed and not on the attack. This is what University of Nebraska at Omaha criminology professor Justin Nix examined in his 2017 study on police killings. Nix’s research, which Cesario cites often in his own study, also focuses on police shooting-killings in 2015, when police killed nearly twice as many white people that year (495) than they did black people (258). But 15 percent of the black people police killed that year were unarmed, compared with just 6 percent of white people who were unarmed when killed by police. The study also found that 24 percent of African Americans and 32 percent of other non-white racial groups were not attacking police officers when they were killed, compared to 17 percent of white people. This was interpreted as “preliminary evidence of an implicit bias effect,” against African Americans and people of color.

What do the recent mass shootings tell us, if anything, about this?

There’s also something to be said for what the victims were doing when the cops shot them. Cesario points out that, “The vast majority—between 90 percent and 95 percent—of the civilians shot by officers were actively attacking police or other citizens when they were shot”—and that there were more white civilians who were committing such attacks when police killed them than were African Americans. In fact, white people were more likely to be armed when police killed them, as Cesario’s study acknowledges—“if anything, [we] found anti-White disparities when controlling for race-specific crime,” reads the study.

The three most recent mass shootings—in Gilroy, California; Dayton, Ohio; and El Paso, Texas—represent extreme examples of armed white men on the attack, but looking at them through the lens of Cesario’s findings is still revealing. Police shot two of the perpetrators, killing one of them. Connor Betts, the shooter who killed nine people and injured 27 more on August 4 in Dayton, was stopped by police bullets less than a minute after his attack began. Police fired at the Gilroy shooter, Santino Legan, but he ultimately succumbed to self-inflicted wounds. Patrick Crusius was arrested “without incident” after killing 22 people and injuring dozens more in El Paso.

In only one of these cases did police actually shoot and kill an armed white suspect who was on the attack: Betts in Dayton. Even that case is murky, though. Betts wore a mask, hearing protection, and body armor—his race was likely not apparent from a distance, and the entire melee happened very quickly. But even if one interprets the fact that police shot at two of those three shooters as evidence of the “anti-White disparity” Cesario mentions, one could also argue that it takes whites committing large-scale acts of terror with automatic weapons for police to respond in the same way that police have responded to, say, a teenager walking away-from-police-while-black.  

The limitations of the data

Another way to determine whether racial bias is a factor is by examining police behavior when their target is unarmed and not on the attack. This is what University of Nebraska at Omaha criminology professor Justin Nix examined in his 2017 study on police killings. Nix’s research, which Cesario cites often in his own study, also focuses on police shooting-killings in 2015, when police killed nearly twice as many white people that year (495) than they did black people (258). But 15 percent of the black people police killed that year were unarmed, compared with just 6 percent of white people who were unarmed when killed by police. The study also found that 24 percent of African Americans and 32 percent of other non-white racial groups were not attacking police officers when they were killed, compared to 17 percent of white people. This was interpreted as “preliminary evidence of an implicit bias effect,” against African Americans and people of color.

Nix, however, is cautious about deriving any firm conclusions from his own findings or Cesario’s because the data on police shootings in general is too limited. The FBI finally launched its database on police-involved shootings just this year, which is why researchers rely on databases created by journalists. And even the subset of data that academics have been working with—police shooting fatalities—have their own range of limitations.

Cesario declares in his press release that “violent crime rates are the driving force behind fatal [police] shootings,” but Nix says that is “pretty strong language in light of the limitations,” especially if looking at when police deploy lethal force at the local level.

“I don’t think the conclusions are warranted based on their analysis,” said Nix. “You can’t restrict the data to just fatal shootings. Another problem is that when doing these bird’s-eye views, you lose nuance from city to city. Policing is a local thing and there’s no reason to believe that everything is the same across the board.”

For example, Nix would want numbers not only on how many times a police officer shoots their weapon, but every time they draw their gun. “You need a benchmark that says how often they were in certain circumstances where they could have shot but did not. That gets us closer to the likelihood of racial bias.”

Nix recently updated his analysis on police shootings using fatal and non-fatal shootings from the 47 largest metros from 2010 to 2016, using a dataset produced by VICE. That analysis found wide variation between the cities—in St. Louis, 16.8 percent of police shootings were fatal; in Phoenix, 51.9 percent were; and, in Tampa, all three of its police shootings were fatal.  

What the studies don’t tell us

Cesario’s study centers the characteristics of the police officer over the victim, concluding essentially that since black and Hispanic police are as likely or more likely to kill people of color as white officers, that the race of the police officer doesn’t matter. But it’s not clear whether that matters in determining whether police bias exists at all. As Philip Atiba Goff, president and cofounder of the Center for Policing Equity, told NPR, “Racism is not a thing that white people can have and black people can’t. And nobody’s research would suggest that it does.”Looking at individual police characteristics doesn’t tell the public anything about the links between structural racism—both within a police department and throughout society—and police violence. Boston University School of Public Health scholar Michael Siegel found that connection in his study last year, which analyzed data on police killings between 2013 and 2017. States that have higher rates of racial segregation, incarceration, educational attainment, economic disparity, and unemployment also tend to have higher levels of police violence against African Americans, Siegel found. Nor does looking at the racial characteristics of individual police shooters tell the public anything about why American law enforcement as a system finds unarmed nonwhite civilians threatening enough to shoot and kill more often than unarmed whites. They don’t explain why police choked Eric Garner, who had no weapon and posed no threat, or why police shot and killed Philando Castile while he was restrained by a seatbelt in a parked car. Meanwhile, Patrick Crusius committed one of the largest terrorist attacks on Latino Americans in U.S history and was apprehended “without incident” while still at the scene of the crime. The point is not that police should have also killed Crusius, but that Garner and Castille should still be alive. 

[4]
”On the video, one of the officers is heard yelling, “Gun, gun, gun”. Police officials initially told local media that Clark was found with a “tool bar” on him, but later clarified that he was only holding a phone.”

THE GUARDIANPROTESTS IN CALIFORNIA AFTER POLICE KILL BLACK MAN CARRYING ONLY HIS PHONE
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/mar/23/stephon-clark-police-shooting-sacramento-protests-california

[5]

”Young Black men are stereotyped as threatening, which can have grave consequences for interactions with police. We show that these threat stereotypes are even greater for tall Black men, who face greater discrimination from police officers and elicit stronger judgments of threat.”

PNAS.ORGFOR BLACK MEN, BEING TALL INCREASES THREAT, STEREOTYPING AND POLICE STOPS13 MARCH 2018
https://www.pnas.org/content/115/11/2711

TEXT

Edited by Jennifer A. Richeson, Yale University, New Haven, CT, and approved January 24, 2018 (received for review August 22, 2017) 

Significance

Young Black men are stereotyped as threatening, which can have grave consequences for interactions with police. We show that these threat stereotypes are even greater for tall Black men, who face greater discrimination from police officers and elicit stronger judgments of threat. We challenge the assumption that height is intrinsically good for men. White men may benefit from height, but Black men may not. More broadly, we demonstrate how demographic factors (e.g., race) can influence how people interpret physical traits (e.g., height). This difference in interpretation is a matter not of magnitude but of meaning: The same trait is positive for some groups of people but negative for others.

Abstract

Height seems beneficial for men in terms of salaries and success; however, past research on height examines only White men. For Black men, height may be more costly than beneficial, primarily signaling threat rather than competence. Three studies reveal the downsides of height in Black men. Study 1 analyzes over 1 million New York Police Department stop-and-frisk encounters and finds that tall Black men are especially likely to receive unjustified attention from police. Then, studies 2 and 3 experimentally demonstrate a causal link between perceptions of height and perceptions of threat for Black men, particularly for perceivers who endorse stereotypes that Black people are more threatening than White people. Together, these data reveal that height is sometimes a liability for Black men, particularly in contexts in which threat is salient.

“When you deal with the police, you must be careful. You are big and they will automatically see you as a threat.” — Charles Coleman, Jr. (6′4″ Black attorney/writer), quoting his mother

Charles Coleman, Jr. evoked his mother’s warning when he wrote about Eric Garner, an unarmed man choked to death by police. Garner was both Black and 6′3″ tall. Coleman highlights the perils of “occupying a Black body that is inherently threatening,” arguing that tall Black men receive disproportionate attention from police officers (1). This argument evokes the “black brute” archetype, which portrays Black men as apelike savages who use their imposing physical frame to threaten others (23). Although Black men face stereotypes of aggression and threat (46), tall Black men may find themselves perceived as especially threatening.

The idea that height has negative consequences contrasts with previous psychological research on height in men, which argues that taller is better. Research finds that tall men seem healthier, more intelligent, more successful, and more physically attractive (79). Tall men also stand a greater chance of being hired (10), making more money (1112), gaining promotions (1314), and winning leadership positions (715).

However, this research almost exclusively explores perceptions of White men (Table S1), who are already positively stereotyped as competent and intelligent (1617). On the other hand, Black men are negatively stereotyped; they are seen as hostile, aggressive, and threatening (e.g., refs. 1720) and are associated with guns (45). For Black men, height may be more often interpreted as a sign of threat instead of competence.

Thus, being tall may not be inherently good or bad for men. Instead, the accessibility of other traits, such as competence and threat, may influence how people interpret height. Classic work in social psychology demonstrates similar effects: Whether a target is initially described as “warm” or “cold” changes how people interpret the target’s other traits (e.g., intelligent, industrious) (21). Considerable research demonstrates that Black men are specifically stereotyped as physically threatening and imposing (2223). For this reason, height may impact judgments of threat more strongly for Black men than for White men.

The Present Research

In three studies, we test whether taller Black men are judged as more threatening than shorter Black men and than both taller and shorter White men. We first examined whether New York City police officers disproportionately stopped and frisked tall Black men from 2006 to 2013 (study 1). We then investigated whether height increases threat judgments more for Black men than for White men by manipulating height both visually (study 2) and descriptively (study 3).

Cultural Stereotypes Pilot

Before conducting these three studies, we first conducted a pilot examining participants’ knowledge of cultural stereotypes, testing whether participants endorse knowledge of stereotypes that tall Black men are seen as especially threatening and tall White men are seen as especially competent. Results showed that cultural stereotypes of threat are increased by tallness more for Black targets than for White targets and, conversely, that cultural stereotypes of competence are increased by tallness more for White targets than for Black targets. Full reporting for this pilot is provided in Pilot Study: Cultural Stereotypes About Height and Race; a graph summarizing the results is shown in Fig. S1.

Results

Study 1: New York Police Department Stop-and-Frisk.

In 2013, Judge Shira Scheindlin of the Federal District Court in New York ruled that the New York Police Department’s (NYPD’s) stop-and-frisk program was unconstitutional because of its clear history of racial discrimination (24). Black and Hispanic people faced disproportionate odds of being stopped by police officers, despite the fact that this “racial profiling” was ineffective. In study 1 we tested whether tall Black men were especially likely to be stopped by NYPD officers.

Before analysis, we cleaned the dataset and made three restrictions. (i) We only used data for non-Hispanic Black and White males, avoiding issues with different distributions of height in the population (i.e., Hispanics are shorter than non-Hispanics; women are shorter than men). (ii) We restricted our data to include only people between 5′4″ and 6′4″. This range in height includes over 98% of Black and White males and prevents outliers (particularly those created by clerical errors) from influencing our results. (iii) We restricted our data to include only people of weights between 100 and 400 lb to prevent outliers created by clerical errors.

Recent work demonstrates that young Black men are perceived as taller and more threatening than young White men, controlling for actual height (22). To account for the alternate explanation that police officers simply perceived Black men as taller than White men (25), we analyzed only cases in which suspects provided photographic identification, which almost always lists height alongside other information that cannot be guessed or estimated, such as date of birth (thus making it highly probable that officers record the listed value for height, rather than estimating it) (26). These restrictions left us with 1,073,536 valid targets for analysis.

The stop-and-frisk dataset is large and includes numerous potential dependent variables. For our analysis, we focus on police officers’ decisions to stop individuals, as this decision is made before any interactions with police, making it more reliant on person perception (27). We recognize the potential issue of flexible analyses and partly address this issue by estimating standardized effect sizes for many variables, which allows comparison of the relative magnitude of effects (especially given that the sample size is large enough to allow accurate estimation of effect size).

We accounted for target weight and the interaction of height and weight to isolate height as a predictor (12). Furthermore, to address an ecological explanation for race effects (28), we nested our data within precinct (to account for variability in geographical factors such as crime rate and land value), included precinct-level felony rates (from 2005–2013), and also included a variable in which officers report whether the stop was made in a high-crime area. Finally, because some research suggests that only young Black men are stereotyped as threatening (29), we include age and the interaction between height and age in our model.

Ratio of Black to White stops.

Under stop-and-frisk rules, police officers had the authority to stop anyone they deemed suspicious or threatening. If tall Black men seem especially threatening, then the ratio of Black to White stops (i.e., how many Black men are stopped per White man) should increase with height.

Accounting for precinct-level felonies, weight, age, and perceived local crime, height still showed a meaningful main effect, B = 0.079, t(1,073,526) = 23.98, P < 0.001, 95% CI [0.070, 0.085]. At 5′4″, police stopped 4.5 Black men for every White man; at 5′10″, police stopped 5.3 Black men for every White man; and at 6′4″, police stopped 6.2 Black men for every White man. These results suggest that taller Black men face a greater risk of being stopped than shorter Black men.

Notably, the ratio of Black to White stops was also greater for heavier men, B = 0.041, t(1,073,526) = 11.80, P < 0.001, 95% CI [0.035, 0.048]. At 115 lb, police stopped 4.5 Black men for every White man; at 175 lb (the average weight in the dataset), police stopped 5.2 Black men for every White man; and at 235 lb, police stopped 5.7 Black men for every White man. Finally, height and weight interacted, B = 0.047, t(1,073,526) = 15.71, P < 0.001, 95% CI [0.041, 0.053], such that each 1-SD increase in weight increases the standardized effect of height by 0.047. Because weight estimates were not provided on photograph IDs (hereafter, “photo IDs”), we interpret these results with caution.

We also found effects for other variables in the model. Unsurprisingly, areas with more crime, as reported by police and captured in precinct-level data, exhibit higher ratios of Black to White stops. The ratio of Black to White stops was also larger for younger men. Interestingly, height and age interacted, such that height’s effect on the ratio of Black to White stops was larger for older Black men. See Table S2 for the full coefficients and a replication of results with both photo and verbal IDs included.

Discussion.

Study 1 demonstrates that tall Black men receive disproportionate attention from police officers. During 8 y of NYPD’s stop-and-frisk program, tall Black men were particularly likely to face unjustified stops by police officers, and these patterns were not explained by biased height estimates (since officers received photo IDs).

In the next two studies, we test whether these results might be explained by an interaction between race and height, such that tallness primarily increases perceptions of threat for Black men and primarily increases perceptions of competence for White men.

Study 2: Manipulating Height with Perspective.

We experimentally manipulated height and race to test whether they interact to influence judgments of threat and competence. To manipulate height, we took photographs of 16 young men—eight Black and eight White—from two perspectives: above the target and below the target. These different perspectives naturalistically manipulated the experience of encountering someone who is tall or short. A manipulation check indicated that perspective significantly influenced participants’ free response estimates of target height, b = 1.78, F(1, 427) = 16.42, P < 0.001, 95% CI [0.91, 2.65], such that targets that were looking down were perceived as taller [mean (M) = 71.6 in.] than targets that were looking up (M = 69.8 in.). See Method for a more detailed description of the perspective manipulation.

Participants rated 16 photographs for adjectives describing both threat and competence. Then, because we expected judgments to depend on participants’ individual beliefs about Black and White people, we assessed participants’ beliefs that Black people are more threatening than White people. We predicted that stronger beliefs about Black threat (BaBT) would increase participants’ tendency to identify tall Black men as especially threatening. We also tested the complementary hypothesis that stronger BaBT might make tall White men seem especially competent. We preregistered these predictions at https://aspredicted.org/465w9.pdf. We also previously conducted another study with a nearly identical design; the results of this study are detailed in Previous Iteration of Study 2.

Race, height, and racial stereotypes.

To test whether those with higher BaBT would judge tall Black men as especially threatening, we fit a three-way multilevel model predicting threat with race, height, and BaBT. This analysis yielded an expected two-way interaction between target race and BaBT, b = 0.19, F(1, 437) = 61.40, P < 0.001, 95% CI [0.14, 0.23], such that those higher in BaBT rated Black men as more threatening relative to White men. Importantly, this analysis also yielded the key three-way interaction, b = 0.15, F(1, 2,081) = 10.97, P = 0.001, 95% CI [0.06, 0.24]. No moderating effect of participant gender emerged (Fig. 1).

For Black targets, the two-way interaction between height and BaBT was significant, b = 0.12, t(833) = 3.67, P < 0.001, 95% CI [0.06, 0.19]: Those higher in BaBT saw tall black men as especially threatening. For White targets, this two-way interaction was not significant, b = −0.03, t(834) = −0.83, P = 0.41, 95% CI [−0.09, 0.04]. These results suggest that the predictive utility of BaBT is moderated by height for stereotype-relevant targets (Black men) but not for stereotype-irrelevant targets (White men). See Additional Analyses for Study 2 for BaBT main effects by race and height.

Although BaBT captures the endorsement of stereotypes about threat and not competence, we nevertheless tested for a three-way interaction with competence ratings. We found an expected two-way interaction between target race and BaBT, b = 0.16, F(1, 459) = 70.27, P < 0.001, 95% CI [0.11, 0.20], such that those higher in BaBT rated White men as more competent relative to Black men. We also found a three-way interaction, b = 0.12, F(1, 1,097) = 7.52, P = 0.006, 95% CI [0.03, 0.20], such that BaBT predicted competence especially strongly for tall White men. Participant gender did not moderate effects. This interaction is further broken down statistically (Additional Analyses for Study 2) and graphically (Fig. S2).

Suppressed height effects.

Height did not increase threat for White men, nor did it increase competence for Black men. However, our pilot study revealed main effects of height on stereotypes of both competence and threat. One possible explanation for this null finding is that, for judgments of tall White men, perceived competence suppressed gains in threat, and, for judgments of tall Black men, perceived threat suppressed gains in competence. Because we found significant race by height interactions for both threat and competence at mean levels of BaBT, we were able to conduct Sobel mediations using the entire sample to test these hypotheses.

For White targets, we found a negative indirect effect of height on threat, ab = −0.04, z = −4.30, P < 0.001; being taller makes targets seem more competent and thus less threatening. Once this indirect effect was accounted for, height no longer decreased threat for White men, b = −0.05, t(1,406) = −1.40, P = 0.16. Conversely, for Black targets, we found a negative indirect effect of height on competence, ab = −0.09, z = −6.07, P < 0.001; being taller makes targets more threatening and thus less competent. Notably, once this indirect effect was accounted for, height increased perceived competence for Black targets, b = 0.09, t(1,406) = 2.75, P = 0.006, suggesting that height may be beneficial for Black men in contexts that sufficiently nullify concerns about threat (e.g., the corporate boardroom).

Discussion.

Study 2 experimentally demonstrates that height amplifies threat for Black men and competence for White men, particularly for perceivers who endorse beliefs that Black people are more threatening than White people. Study 2 also found indirect negative effects of height on competence for Black men and threat for White men.

Study 3: Manipulating Height with Descriptions.

Although the photographs from study 2 have naturalistic validity, they may also confound height with intimidation (30). We address this concern by manipulating height with text vignettes (e.g., “As you approach each other, you can see that he is very short/quite tall”) and manipulating race with standardized photographs. See Textual Descriptions of Height Used in Study 3 for text descriptions of height.

Participants rated 16 targets on the same threat and competence adjectives used in study 2. They then completed the BaBT scale. As in the previous experiment, we predicted that those higher in BaBT would make especially strong threat judgments for tall Black men and especially strong competence judgments for tall White men. We preregistered these predictions at https://aspredicted.org/sp3aj.pdf.

Race, height, and racial stereotypes.

We again fit a multilevel model predicting threat with race, height, and BaBT. We replicated the key findings of study 2; those higher in BaBT rated Black men as more threatening relative to White men, b = 0.15, F(1, 374) = 30.83, P < 0.001, 95% CI [0.10, 0.20], and this effect was especially large for tall Black men, b = 0.16, F(1, 1,548) = 9.04, P = 0.003, 95% CI [0.06, 0.27]. Participant gender did not moderate effects (Fig. 2).

We also replicated the competence results of study 2: Those higher in BaBT rated White men as more competent relative to Black men, b = 0.11, F(1, 320) = 20.36, P < 0.001, 95% CI [0.05, 0.17], and this effect was especially large for tall White men, b = 0.10, F(1, 1,518) = 3.78, P = 0.052, 95% CI [−0.00, 0.20]. No moderating effect of participant gender emerged. See Additional Analyses for Study 3 for the breakdown of both the threat and competence interactions.

Discussion.

Study 3 addressed stimuli concerns from study 2 and again demonstrated that, for those higher in BaBT, tall Black men seem especially threatening compared with short Black men and both short and tall White men.

General Discussion

In three studies, we showed that taller is not always better; although tall White men may benefit from increased perceptions of competence, tall Black men are burdened with increased perceptions of threat. We first revealed that NYPD police officers stopped tall Black men at a disproportionately high rate (study 1). We then demonstrated that, for perceivers who endorse stereotypes that Black people are more threatening than White people, tall Black men seem especially threatening (studies 2 and 3).

Previous research has amply demonstrated that people may interpret traits and behaviors as positive or negative depending on the accessibility of other concepts. For example, a classic study revealed that a target’s ambiguous actions are negatively evaluated when participants are first primed with hostility-related traits (versus kindness-related traits) (31). Racial stereotypes alter the accessibility of traits during person perception, which influences how people interpret other traits—in this case, height. For people who already perceive Black men as threatening, height confers extra threat.

Our findings have important implications when considered alongside recent research demonstrating that young Black men are perceived as taller and more muscular than young White men of equivalent size, which causes them to also seem more threatening to non-Black participants (22). The present findings suggest that the negative consequences of these biased height perceptions (i.e., increased threat perceptions) hinge on how strongly the perceiver believes that Black people are threatening (thus interpreting height as a sign of threat).

Height may also interact with more subtle cues of race, such as Afrocentric features (3233), and the effect of height may be determined by contextual cues. Once we controlled for perceived threat in study 2, taller Black men were actually perceived as more competent than shorter Black men. When competence is clearly more relevant than threat, Black men may also benefit from height. Alternately, Black men may also benefit from height if they possess other traits that reduce threat, such as babyfacedness (34).

More broadly, these results highlight the importance of intersections between social categories and physical traits. Just as social categories such as race, gender, age, and socioeconomic status intersect in important ways with each other (3536), so too do they influence the impact of physical factors such as height (37), weight (38), babyfacedness (34), and facial attractiveness (39).

We recognize that our findings do not necessarily generalize to perceptions of women. We limited our targets to men because police profiling and threatening stereotypes both target Black males. However, future research should investigate whether the same race–height interactions apply for women. Previous work indicates that White women enjoy at least some of the same benefits of height as White men (7), but no work to date has investigated the effects of height for perceptions of Black women.

We also recognize the potential role of weight in perceptions of threat. Consistent with others’ previous work (2225), our stop-and-frisk analyses suggest that weight also plays a key role in judgments of suspicion. Because of accuracy concerns about the weight estimates, which may have been biased (22), and the relatively large effect size of height, we chose to focus on height; however, future work should further investigate how height and weight combine with categories such as race and gender to influence judgments.

Being tall is often discussed as a wholly good trait, so much so that Randy Newman wrote a satirical song that lists reasons why “short people got no reason to live.” However, height means something different for Black men: Height amplifies already problematic perceptions of threat, which can lead to harassment and even injury. When Charles Coleman, Jr.’s mother told him that he “was big and they would automatically see [him] as a threat,” she eloquently summarized what we empirically showed—for Black men, being tall may be less a boon and more a burden.

Method

The University of North Carolina Institutitional Review Board (IRB) approved studies 2 and 3 as well as the pilot study. Participants in these studies indicated consent electronically and received debriefing at the end of the studies. Study 1 did not use human subjects and required no IRB approval.

Study 1 data are available at www1.nyc.gov/site/nypd/stats/reports-analysis/stopfrisk.page. Data for the pilot study, study 2, and study 3 are available in Supporting Information.

Study 1.

We combined 8 y of publicly available data (2006–2013) documenting the NYPD’s stop-and-frisk program. These data include information about every person stopped as part of the program, including race, age, gender, height, weight, and whether the person was frisked, searched, arrested, or issued a summons. Notably, we only analyzed stops in which officers received photo ID, ensuring the relative accuracy of the reported height and age (26).

We cleaned the data by filtering cases with clear errors (i.e., a large number of people had ages of 99 y or higher, or birth years of 1900). We also restricted the dataset to non-Hispanic Black and White males. By focusing on non-Hispanic Black and White males, we minimized problems of distribution: Adult Black and White males have nearly identical means and distributions of height (40).

Study 2.

Participants and design.

Two hundred participants (73% White, 6% Black, 42% women, Mage = 36 y) completed a 2 × 2 [Target Race: Black, White by Target Perspective: Looking Down (Tall), Looking Up (Short)] within-subjects study. With n = 200 at level 2 and n = 16 at level 1 and a subject slope variance of 0.39, we had ∼88% power to detect a small cross-level interaction (41).

Materials.

Creating stimuli to manipulate height and race.

To create stimuli, we photographed 16 male students from the University of North Carolina. Eight students were White, and eight were Black. We photographed each student from two perspectives: looking up and looking down. We intended to manipulate perceived height: If someone is looking down on you, they are likely taller, but if they are looking up at you, they are likely shorter. This perspective manipulation allowed us to manipulate height in a within-subjects design, addressing both power and stimulus sampling issues (42). In particular, our attention to stimulus sampling reduces the likelihood that our effects were driven by the traits of a particular photograph and minimizes the possibility that small variations in luminance or target size explain our effects (42). See Fig. 3 for examples of stimuli.

To check whether our manipulation of height actually worked, we predicted the estimated height of each target by target perspective. The analysis revealed a main effect of target perspective on estimated height, b = 1.78, F(1, 427) = 16.42, P < 0.001, 95% CI [0.91, 2.65], such that targets who were looking down were perceived as taller (M = 71.6 in.) than targets who were looking up (M = 69.8 in.). We found no main effect of race, b = −0.39, F(1, 427) = 0.80, P = 0.37, 95% CI [−1.26, 0.48], although we did find a race by perspective interaction, b = 1.77, F(1, 2,322) = 4.12, P = 0.043, 95% CI [0.06, 3.48], such that perspective had a larger effect for Black targets. Simple main effects show that Black looking-up targets were perceived as 1.3 in. shorter than White looking-up targets, b = −1.27, t(899) = 2.05, P = 0.041, 95% CI [−2.49, −0.05]. The difference between Black and White looking-down targets was not significant, b = 0.49, t(3,018) = 0.80, P = 0.42, 95% CI [−0.72, 1.72].

BaBT.

Participants answered questions adapted from the General Social Survey (gss.norc.org/). We used these questions because they are less confounded with political beliefs than other scales (43) and directly target stereotypes of Black threat. Participants provided their attitudes toward Black, Hispanic, and White people on seven-point bipolar scales for “nonviolent/violent,” “nonthreatening/threatening,” “nonaggressive/aggressive,” and “not dangerous/dangerous.” Questions about Hispanic targets were included to decrease the focus on Black and White targets and reduce the effect of social desirability on responses.

To create an index variable representing participants’ BaBT, we subtracted participants’ attitudes about White targets from their attitudes about Black targets to capture the relative difference in participants’ attitudes (believing Blacks are more violent than Whites) rather than their overall attitudes (believing people are generally violent regardless of race). Then, we averaged the four difference scores together.

Procedure.

Participants rated 16 photographs of college-aged males on five traits: competent, likable, attractive, threatening, and aggressive. These photographs were counterbalanced, such that each target was seen by half of the participants as looking up and by the other half as looking down. The first item captured competence, and the last two items captured threat. We initially included “likable” and “attractive” as competence items but removed them as suggested by reviewers and the editor; this change did not influence our results. Participants also estimated the height of each target, in inches. After completing these ratings, participants completed the BaBT scale.

Analytic strategy.

We again accounted for between-participant variance by using hierarchical linear modeling, with responses nested within participants. We allowed slopes to vary for both race and perspective manipulations to provide a more precise model and allow cross-level interaction with BaBT.

Study 3.

Participants and design.

Two hundred eight participants (75% White, 10% Black, 61% women, Mage = 38 y) completed a 2 × 2 (Target Race: Black, White by Described Height: Tall, Short) within-subjects study. This study sought to replicate the three-way interaction of study 2 with stimuli that more specifically manipulate height. With n = 208 at level 2 and n = 8 at level 1 and a subject slope variance of 0.28, we had ∼90% power to detect a small cross-level interaction (41).

Materials and procedure.

To manipulate race, we used 20 Black male and 20 White male faces from the Chicago Face Database (44). These faces were chosen based on age; all targets were between 21 and 29 y old. To manipulate height, we described an encounter with each target in which the target was either taller or shorter than the participant. Participants rated eight targets using the same competence and threat items as in study 2. Participants then completed the BaBT scale. The analytic strategy was identical to that of study 2.

Preregistration Details.

We note a few points of discrepancy between our preregistrations and the presented results. (i) The study 2 preregistration did not include the specific hypothesis that people higher in BaBT would judge tall White men as especially competent. (ii) The study 3 preregistration notes the inclusion of BaBT as a potential moderator but does not explicitly state the specific hypotheses. (iii) The specific traits used in the “competence” and “threat” composites were not listed in the preregistrations.
END OF ARTICLE

[6]

VOX.COMBLACK PEOPLE ARE STILL SUFFERING FROM POLICE VIOLENCE. IS AMERICA STILL LISTENING?24 MAY 2019
https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/5/24/18636305/police-violence-eric-garner-sandra-bland-black-lives-matter

Five years after the rise of Black Lives Matter, activists are still protesting. But national attention to police misconduct has waned.  

It’s been nearly five years since several high-profile incidents of police violence spurred racial justice protests in Ferguson, Missouri, and chants of “black lives matter!” began to echo across the country.

The deaths of several black men and women, including Eric Garner, Michael Brown, Sandra Bland, Freddie Gray, Alton Sterling, and Philando Castile, drew national attention to issues of race and policing and spurred on demands for police reform.

But recent developments in two high-profile cases raise questions about whether police violence is still a flashpoint issue — or if national attention to the problem has faded.

In early May, a previously unreleased video recorded by Sandra Bland, the black woman whose 2015 death in a Texas jail cell sparked protests, emerged. The video showed Bland’s perspective of the traffic stop that led to her arrest, and it contradicted police claims that she posed a threat to the officer who pulled her over. Bland’s family and others have since demanded that the investigation into the circumstances surrounding her death be reopened.

About a week later, the disciplinary hearing for Daniel Pantaleo, the NYPD officer accused of recklessly using a department-prohibited chokehold on Eric Garner, kicked off in New York City. Garner, an unarmed black man, died in 2014 shortly after being restrained by Pantaleo, and officers failed to immediately render first aid. Video of his arrest, and his gasps of “I can’t breathe,” became a rallying cry for activists.

Pantaleo, who is still employed by the NYPD, was not indicted by a grand jury in 2014, but he’s now facing a department trial that could result in him losing his job as an officer. Several new details about the case have been revealed to the public, including the fact that a police lieutenant texted a different NYPD officer that Garner’s death was “not a big deal,” and that another officer inflated charges against Garner when filling out an arrest form after the man died.

The new revelations in both the Bland and Garner cases are striking — yet they arrive at a time where national anger over police violence doesn’t seem to be as strong as it was when their deaths occurred.

More recent police shootings and incidents of police brutality still draw local attention and activist outrage, but they often fail to attract the same level of public attention they did from 2014 to 2016. At the federal level, the Trump administration has halted efforts to enact police accountability measures. And years into racial justice activists’ fight for structural reform, many of the systems that shield officers from accountability remain in place. In short, it appears that public interest in these problems is waning, along with the momentum to push for police reform — even as the need for these changes remain.

Black and brown Americans still suffer from police violence

The Washington Post has been tracking fatal police encounters since 2015, and for the past four years, the database has found that roughly 1,000 people have died in police shootings each year. So far, 363 people have been killed by police in 2019 alone, according to the Post database.

Even now, these shootings continue to disproportionately affect black Americans. A 2018 article in the Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health found that while roughly half of police shooting victims are white, young black Americans and Native Americans are disproportionately likely to be killed in a police shooting.

And as Vox’s Dara Lind and German Lopez have previously reported, significant racial disparities have also been seen in federal data and other media-compiled databases of shootings, like the Guardian’s Counted project, which ran from 2015 to 2016.

Black people are also more likely than whites to be exposed to arrests and traffic stops that could potentially escalate into violent encounters.

But recent police violence incidents and shootings haven’t dominated headlines or spurred calls for federal investigations and demands for national police reform efforts in the same way they did three or four years ago. And while some stories that center on the deaths of unarmed black men — such as the fatal 2018 shooting of 22-year old Stephon Clark in his family’s Sacramento, California, backyard — continue to go viral, they tend to fade from public view more quickly, even as activists on the ground continue their protests.

“Police violence — beatings, Taserings, killings — and criminal justice reform more broadly were arguably the leading domestic news storyline during the final two years of the Obama administration,” Washington Post reporter Wesley Lowery wrote last year. In 2018, he added, “the issue has all but vanished from the national political conversation.”

That trend has been noticed by other writers, like the Week’s Bonnie Kristian, who recently wrote that part of the problem may be that public opinion of police has improved among some groups:

Indignation about police misconduct and calls for reform were fading among the white majority by early 2016, as I wrote here at The Week at the time. Polling in late 2015 showed white Americans found police more trustworthy after 18 months of notorious police custody deaths and resultant protests. Already it was becoming evident that cases which once would (and should) have provoked national controversy were increasingly met with desensitization and indifference outside of local protests.

In 2017, a Gallup poll showed that public confidence in police was back to its historical average, with 57 percent of those polled saying they had “a great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidence in police compared to 52 percent in 2015. This was largely driven by shifts among white Americans, with more people expressing confidence in police in the 2015-17 period than from 2012 to 2014 (61 percent to 58 percent). During that same time confidence in police fell among black Americans, going from 35 precent in 2012-14 to 30 percent in 2015-17.

Black Americans are also significantly less likely to view police “warmly” when compared to white Americans.

There could be several reasons for the change in the national discussion of policing, but one factor stands out in particular: the election of President Donald Trump. Trump’s election and presidency has consumed a significant amount of media attention and public discussion, leaving little space for discussions of policy issues like police reform.

The Trump administration has also effectively halted federal momentum on policing reform. Under former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, the Trump administration announced it would review old police reform agreements between the federal government and police departments and also stop entering into new ones.

In cities like Baltimore and Chicago, the Justice Department went so far as to attempt to intervene in ongoing reform efforts, arguing that reform agreements would hamper effectiveness and morale of police officers.

Lack of police accountability is still very much a problem

In recent years, several of the most high-profile cases of police violence have ended with officers not facing charges or not being convicted. This is largely due to longstanding legal standards giving officers wide latitude to use force.

It is possible the continued dismissal of police misconduct cases by police departments or the legal system — especially in incidents caught on video — has created a sense of futility, or discouragement, among some people who were first exposed to police violence incidents back in 2014.

While some officers involved in police violence are never indicted, in other cases, like the case of Michael Rosfeld, a former East Pittsburgh officer who fatally shot 17-year-old Antwon Rose in 2018, officers faced trial but were not convicted. Convictions remain very rare in police shooting cases, and officers who are given prison time for their involvement in shootings is rarer still.

In fact, the only acknowledgement of wrongdoing often comes in the form of settlements given to the families of police-shooting victims. But these settlements, which usually arrive after lawsuits (and in some cases aren’t given), are far from the systemic reform that activists and families of victims have demanded.

And because these protections largely hinge on if an officer had a “reasonable” belief that he or others were in danger rather than if a threat was actually expressed, the result is that some police misconduct or excessive force is shielded from prosecution. Efforts to change that standard have emerged in states like California, but no laws have yet to be passed.

There are other longstanding practices within police departments that make accountability for police misconduct, abuse, and fatal shootings a challenge. A 2016 New York Times report and 2017 Washington Post investigation found that officers who were fired from departments for misconduct or criminal behavior often go on to be hired by other departments or are rehired by the same agency that dismissed them. And tracking officer misconduct, or viewing body camera footage of a police shooting, remains difficult for the public.

Public attention has waned, but activists continue to push for reform

Though police violence and lack of accountability remains a very real problem, Americans in general simply seem less interested in hearing about it — which makes it more difficult for activists and politicians to push through tangible reforms.

However, that doesn’t mean people have given up. Instead, groups seem to be putting more of an emphasis on pushing for structural change from within.

The police reform-oriented Campaign Zero and the Movement for Black Lives have outlined detailed policy plans aimed at policing, but they have also demanded changes to education systems and the economy and joined a larger set of groups making up the anti-Trump “resistance.”

Other groups are seeking to boost black political engagement in the upcoming election and things like the 2020 census in an effort to force politicians to address black voters’ concerns about racism and police accountability.Activists say their fight for justice is as urgent now as it was five years ago, and that while systemic policy change may still be a work in progress, their movement has had an impact. “Since we started using the hashtag #blacklivesmatter, since the jump start of this current iteration of the Black Liberation movement, I know the world has transformed,” Patrisse Cullors, a co-founder of the Black Lives Matter Network, wrote in a 2018 HuffPost op-ed. “I know the world is changing.” 
END OF ARTICLE
NEW REPORT IACHR:

IACHR [Inter-American Commission on Human Rights]NEW IACHR REPORT ADDRESSES POLICE VIOLENCE AGAINST BLACK AMERICANS25 MARCH 2019
https://ijrcenter.org/2019/03/25/new-iachr-report-addresses-police-violence-against-black-americans/

IACHR REPORT:POLICE VIOLENCE AGAINST AFRO DESCENDANTS IN THE UNITED STATES
http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/reports/pdfs/PoliceUseOfForceAfrosUSA.pdf

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL USAANOTHER YEAR, AN OTHER UNARMED BLACK MAN KILLED BY THE POLICE
https://www.amnestyusa.org/another-year-another-unarmed-black-man-killed-by-police/

[7]

BLACK LIVES MATTER/WEBSITE
https://blacklivesmatter.com

YOUTUBE.COMWOMAN SHOT AND KILLED BY POLICE OFFICER IN HER OWN HOME

[8]
and unarmed black Americans are five times as likely as unarmed white Americans to be shot and killed by police officers.’

AMNESTY INTERNATIONALDEADLY FORCE AND POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY
https://www.amnestyusa.org/issues/deadly-force-police-accountability/

[9]

AMNESTY INTERNATIONALDEADLY FORCE AND POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY
https://www.amnestyusa.org/issues/deadly-force-police-accountability/

[10]
THE WASHINGTON POSTPOLICE SHOOTINGS 2016
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2016/

Fatal Force

962people have been shot and killed by police in 2016. This database is based on news reports, public records, social media and other sources.
Read about our methodologyDownload the data.
See the 201920182017 and 2015 databases.

[11]
THE WASHINGTON POSTPOLICE SHOOTINGS 2019
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/national/police-shootings-2019/

Fatal Force

717people have been shot and killed by police in 2019Read about our methodologyDownload the data. See the 201820172016 and 2015 databases. Submit a tip

Updated Oct. 17 at 8:24 p.m. [12] 

”About 1 in 1,000 black men and boys in America can expect to die at the hands of police, according to a new analysis of deaths involving law enforcement officers.”
LA TIMESGETTING KILLED BY POLICE IS A LEADING CAUSE OF DEATH FOR BLACK MEN IN AMERICA
https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2019-08-15/police-shootings-are-a-leading-cause-of-death-for-black-men

[13]
” That makes them 2.5 times more likely than white men and boys to die during an encounter with cops.

LA TIMESGETTING KILLED BY POLICE IS A LEADING CAUSE OF DEATH FOR BLACK MEN IN AMERICA
https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2019-08-15/police-shootings-are-a-leading-cause-of-death-for-black-men

[14]
The analysis also showed that Latino men and boys, black women and girls and Native American men, women and children are also killed by police at higher rates than their white peers. But the vulnerability of black males was particularly striking.

LA TIMESGETTING KILLED BY POLICE IS A LEADING CAUSE OF DEATH FOR BLACK MEN IN AMERICA
https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2019-08-15/police-shootings-are-a-leading-cause-of-death-for-black-men

[15]
[WARNING ABOUT WIKIPEDIAWIKIPEDIA MAY NOT BE THAT ACCURATE AND SINCE THIS TRAGIC NEWS HAS HAPPENED RECENTLY, MAYBE NOT ALL THE WRITTEN FACTS ARE THAT ACCURATE/RELY MORE ON YOUTUBE, ABC NEWS AND OTHER NEWSSOURCES I MENTION HERE]
WIKIPEDIAKILLING OF ATATIANA JEFFERSON
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Atatiana_Jefferson

ABC NEWSTEXAS COP NEVER IDENTIFIED HIMSELF AS POLICE BEFORE FATALLY SHOOTING ATATIANA JEFFERSON IN HER OWN HOME: OFFICIAL13 OCTOBER 2019

https://abcnews.go.com/US/officer-bodycam-shooting-killing-woman-home/story?id=66237208

A white police officer responding to a call early Saturday for a welfare check at a home in Fort Worth, Texas, fired a shot into a bedroom window, striking and killing a 28-year-old black woman who a neighbor said was not a threat

Relatives of the woman who was fatally shot identified her as Atatiana Jefferson, and said she worked as a human resources officer for a Fort Worth company and that she lived in the home with an 8-year-old nephew, Dallas ABC affiliate WFAA reported.(MORE: 4 people killed in ‘mass casualty shooting’ at illegal gambling club in Brooklyn: Police)

During a news conference on Sunday afternoon, Fort Worth Police Lt. Brandon O’Neil said the officer who opened fire on Jefferson never identified himself as a police officer.

“What the officer observed and why he did not announce ‘police’ will be addressed as the investigation continues,” O’Neil said.

The NAACP released a statement on Twitter calling the fatal shooting of Jefferson “UNACCEPTABLE!”

“The acts of yet another ‘trained’ police officer have resulted in the death of #AtatianaJefferson Gun downed in her own home,” the NAACP wrote. “If we are not safe to call the police, if we are not safe in our homes, where can we find peace? We demand answers. We demand justice.”

James Smith, a neighbor, said the shooting unfolded after he called the non-emergency police number to report seeing the lights on and the front door open at Jefferson’s home. He said police arrived at the home around 2:30 a.m. without activating their lights and sirens.

“I called my police department for a welfare check,” Smith told WFAA. “No domestic violence, no arguing, nothing that they should have been concerned about as far as them coming with guns drawn to my neighbor’s house.”

Hearing the gunshot shocked him, he said.

“I don’t know what went on in that house, but I know she wasn’t a threat,” Smith said. “I’m still kind of broken and shocked. They tell me I shouldn’t feel bad. But I feel bad cause had I not called the police department, she would probably still be alive today.” 

Civil rights attorney Lee Merritt said Jefferson’s “understandably heartbroken” relatives told him that Jefferson and her nephew were playing video games when they heard noises outside.

“She went to investigate at the window. An officer was on the other side who shouted commands and before she had a moment to respond, he shot her to death,” said Merritt, who also represents the family of Botham Jean, a 26-year-old black man shot to death in September 2018 by white former Dallas police officer Amber Guyger, who mistook Jean’s apartment for her own and wrongly suspected he was an intruder.

The Fort Worth Police Department did not release the name of the officer.

O’Neil said police received a call at 2:25 a.m. to respond to the home on East Allen Avenue. He said two officers arrived at the house at 2:29 am. and parked near Jefferson’s home, but not in front of the residence. He said the officers walked around the back of the house, and that one of the officers observed a person through the rear window of the home and opened fire.

Body-camera footage released by the department shows the officer approaching a rear window of the home with his gun drawn. The officer sees the woman through the window, shouts, “Put your hands up, show me your hands,” and fires one shot.

The video seems to confirm the officer never identified himself as police before he opened fire.

The front door appears open in the body-camera footage, but a screen door looks to be closed in front of it. The officer doesn’t appear to knock.

“Perceiving a threat, the officer drew his duty weapon and fired one shot striking the person inside the residence,” a statement from the police department reads.(MORE: Cop never ID’d himself as police before killing woman in her own home: Official)

Responding officers entered the home, located the shooting victim and began providing emergency care.

Jefferson died at the scene.

“An 8-year-old male, Ms. Jefferson’s nephew, was inside the room during this time,” O’Neil said.

O’Neil declined to answer questions from reporters, saying Police Chief Ed Kraus is scheduled to hold a news conference about the shooting on Monday.

He said the officer who shot Jefferson is scheduled to be interviewed on Monday by the department’s Major Case Unit investigators.

A firearm was recovered from the woman’s home, but police did not say where the gun was found in the house. The investigation is ongoing.

The officer, who’s been with the department since April 2018, has been placed on administrative leave.

Merritt set up a GoFundMe page to raise money for Jefferson’s funeral. As of Sunday afternoon, more than $81,000 had been raised.

 Fort Worth Mayor Betsy Price released a statement saying the Police Chief Ed Kraus and his command staff “are acting with immediacy and transparency to conduct a complete and thorough investigation.”

She said the case will be turned over to the Tarrant County District Attorney Law Enforcement Incident Team to investigate the incident further.

“Writing a statement like this is tragic and something that should never be necessary,” Price said in her statement. “A young woman has lost her life, leaving her family in unbelievable grief. All of Fort Worth must surround Atatiana Jefferson’s family with prayers, love and support.”
END OF THE ARTICLE OF ABC NEWS

THE NEW YORK TIMESWHAT WE KNOW ABOUT THE FORT WORTH POLICE SHOOTING OFATATIANA JEFFERSON
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/15/us/aaron-dean-atatiana-jefferson.html

Aaron Dean, the officer who shot Ms. Jefferson in her own home, resigned hours before he was charged with murder.  

Days after a woman was fatally shot by the Fort Worth police, the officer who fired one bullet through her bedroom window when responding to a call from a concerned neighbor was arrested and charged with murder.

Although the circumstances have varied, it was yet another example of a white officer killing a black civilian, raising nationwide questions about policing practices and racial profiling. The shock of Saturday’s shooting further strained the relationship between residents and the Fort Worth Police Department.

The woman who was killed, Atatiana Jefferson, had been up late playing video games with her 8-year-old nephew, according to the family’s lawyer. She was shot by an officer, Aaron Y. Dean, who was standing in her backyard with a flashlight and a gun. He resigned on Monday, hours before the police chief had planned to fire him.

Here is what we know about the shooting and its aftermath:

Mr. Dean, who had been placed on administrative leave before he resigned, has not answered questions from investigators, said Ed Kraus, the interim police chief.

He was arrested without incident in his lawyer’s office on Monday and released from the Tarrant County jail later that night after posting a $200,000 bond. His lawyer has not responded to calls seeking comment, but he told the local NBC television station that Mr. Dean is sorry and that his family was in shock.

Mr. Dean joined the department in April 2018, one month after completing his classes at the police academy, and the only notable entry in his personnel file was for a traffic accident, Chief Kraus said.

Officer Manny Ramirez, the president of the Fort Worth Police Officers Association, said Mr. Dean had never been the subject of an investigation and was “very shaken up” by the shooting.

Chief Kraus grew emotional this week as he described how the killing would undoubtedly erode the trust that he said officers had worked to build with the people they serve.

“I likened it to a bunch of ants building an ant hill, and somebody comes with a hose and washes it away,” he said. “They just have to start from scratch.”

Chief Kraus said he had spoken to scores of officers who all said they supported the quick move to arrest Mr. Dean and charge him with murder.

Officer Ramirez said he and other officers had been dumbfounded as to why Mr. Dean pulled the trigger. Mr. Ramirez added that there was “no way to explain” his actions.

Ms. Jefferson, 28, sold medical pharmaceutical equipment from home while studying to apply to medical school. She had earned a degree in biology from Xavier University of Louisiana in 2014.

Ms. Jefferson was a loving aunt who would play basketball and video games with her nephews, her sister Amber Carr said. She had recently moved in with her mother, who had health problems — and learned about her daughter’s shooting while in a hospital.

One of Ms. Jefferson’s neighbors, James Smith, had called a nonemergency line at 2:23 a.m. on Saturday to express concern that the doors of Ms. Jefferson’s house had been open for several hours.

“I haven’t seen anybody moving around,” he told the dispatcher in a calm voice. “It’s not normal for them to have the doors open this time of night.”

Mr. Smith’s niece later said that he was upset with how the police responded, and that he had never suggested a burglary was taking place.

Chief Kraus said the call was relayed to the two officers who responded as a call for an “open structure,” a vague classification that could mean anything from an abandoned house to a burglary in progress. It was not a welfare check, in which case officers would often knock on the house’s doors or call inside.

A gun was found on the floor of Ms. Jefferson’s bedroom near the window. When Ms. Jefferson heard noises coming from outside, she had taken a handgun from her purse and pointed it toward the window, her 8-year-old nephew told officials, according to an arrest warrant released on Tuesday.

But the other officer who responded with Mr. Dean said she could only see Ms. Jefferson’s face through the window when Mr. Dean fired, according to the warrant, and Chief Kraus has defended her right to have a gun in her own home.

“It makes sense that she would have a gun if she felt that she was being threatened or that there was someone in the back yard,” he said at a news conference on Tuesday.
YOUTUBE.COMCOP SEEN SHOOTING, KILLING WOMAN IN HER OWN HOME/ABC NEWS

YOUTUBE.COMWOMAN SHOT AND KILLED BY POLICE OFFICER IN HER OWN HOME

YOUTUBE.COMPROTESTS IN FORT WORTH AFTER ATATIANA JEFFERSON IN HER OWN HOME
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clUG0hxQlW0

[16]
SEE NOTE 15

[17]
WIKIPEDIAKILLING OF ATATIANA JEFFERSON

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Atatiana_Jefferson

[18]

”During a news conference on Sunday afternoon, Fort Worth Police Lt. Brandon O’Neil said the officer who opened fire on Jefferson never identified himself as a police officer.

“What the officer observed and why he did not announce ‘police’ will be addressed as the investigation continues,” O’Neil said.”
ABC NEWSTEXAS COP NEVER IDENTIFIED HIMSELF AS POLICE BEFORE FATALLY SHOOTING ATATIANA JEFFERSON IN HER OWN HOME: OFFICIAL13 OCTOBER 2019

https://abcnews.go.com/US/officer-bodycam-shooting-killing-woman-home/story?id=66237208

[19]

YOUTUBE.COMWOMAN SHOT AND KILLED BY POLICE OFFICER IN HER OWN HOME

[20]

”When Ms. Jefferson heard noises coming from outside, she had taken a handgun from her purse and pointed it toward the window, her 8-year-old nephew told officials, according to an arrest warrant released on Tuesday.”

THE NEW YORK TIMESWHAT WE KNOW ABOUT THE FORT WORTH POLICE SHOOTING OFATATIANA JEFFERSON15 OCTOBER 2019
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/15/us/aaron-dean-atatiana-jefferson.html

WIKIPEDIAKILLING OF ATATIANA JEFFERSON/NEPHEW’S ACCOUNT

Nephew’s account[edit]

Jefferson’s nephew told the authorities that while playing video games they heard noises outside the window. Jefferson took her gun from her purse and pointed it at the window, before she was shot. The nephew’s account was used as the basis for the arrest warrant.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Atatiana_Jefferson#Nephew’s_account

ORIGINAL SOURCE
WIKIPEDIAKILLING OF ATATIANA JEFFERSON
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Atatiana_Jefferson
[21]

”A gun was found on the floor of Ms. Jefferson’s bedroom near the window. When Ms. Jefferson heard noises coming from outside, she had taken a handgun from her purse and pointed it toward the window, her 8-year-old nephew told officials, according to an arrest warrant released on Tuesday.

But the other officer who responded with Mr. Dean said she could only see Ms. Jefferson’s face through the window when Mr. Dean fired, according to the warrant, and Chief Kraus has defended her right to have a gun in her own home.”
THE NEW YORK TIMESWHAT WE KNOW ABOUT THE FORT WORTH POLICE SHOOTING OFATATIANA JEFFERSON15 OCTOBER 2019
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/15/us/aaron-dean-atatiana-jefferson.html

[22]
”A gun was found on the floor of Ms. Jefferson’s bedroom near the window.

THE NEW YORK TIMESWHAT WE KNOW ABOUT THE FORT WORTH POLICE SHOOTING OFATATIANA JEFFERSON15 OCTOBER 2019
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/15/us/aaron-dean-atatiana-jefferson.html

[23]
”The Second Amendment (Amendment II) to the United States Constitution protects the individual right to keep and bear arms.[1][2][a] It was ratified on December 15, 1791 as part of the Bill of Rights.

WIKIPEDIASECOND AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

 WIKIPEDIA
CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_United_States

Article [II] (Amendment 2 – Bearing Arms)

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION

https://constitutionus.com

[24]

But the other officer who responded with Mr. Dean said she could only see Ms. Jefferson’s face through the window when Mr. Dean fired, according to the warrant, and Chief Kraus has defended her right to have a gun in her own home. 
THE NEW YORK TIMESWHAT WE KNOW ABOUT THE FORT WORTH POLICE SHOOTING OFATATIANA JEFFERSON15 OCTOBER 2019

 [25]

NAACP/WEBSITE

[26]

NAACP ON TWITTERSTATEMENT

NAACP✔@NAACP

UNACCEPTABLE! The acts of yet another “trained” police officer have resulted in the death of #AtatianaJefferson. Gun downed in her own home. If we are not safe to call the police, if we are not safe in our homes, where can we find peace? We demand answers. We demand justice.

View image on Twitter

22.6K5:44 AM – Oct 13, 2019Twitter Ads info and privacy12.6K people are talking about this[27]

VOX.COMFORT WORTH OFFICER CHARGED WITH MURDER IN  KILLING OF BLACK WOMAN IN HER OWN HOME15 OCTOBER 2019
https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/10/13/20912212/atatiana-jefferson-fort-worth-police-shooting-texas-aaron-dean-murder

Aaron Dean, the officer who shot Atatiana Jefferson, resigned on Monday, hours before he was booked on murder charges.

In the days since a black woman was fatally shot in her Fort Worth, Texas, home by a white police officer performing a welfare check, calls for police accountability have been nonstop in a community whose trust in law enforcement has already been shaken by other police shootings and the death of Botham Jean in nearby Dallas.

Local authorities have moved quickly in their response, saying that they have every intention of taking action against the officer who fired through a home window, killing 28-year-old Atatiana Koquice Jefferson on October 12 as she stood in her bedroom with her 8-year-old nephew, who she had been playing video games with.

A neighbor had called a non-emergency police line minutes before saying that he wanted someone to make sure that Jefferson and her nephew were okay after seeing their open door so late in the evening. When police arrived, they walked around the outside of the home instead of announcing themselves at the front door, and one officer fired his weapon at a window shortly after entering the home’s backyard, striking and killing Jefferson in the process.

On Monday, the Fort Worth Police Department announced that Aaron Dean, the officer who shot Jefferson, had resigned from the department hours before he would have been terminated. That same evening, Dean was booked into the Tarrant County Correction Center on murder charges. He was later released on a $200,000 bond.

The police department has attempted to show residents that it is taking Jefferson’s case seriously and that it understands the fury her death, as yet another example of a black person being killed by law enforcement, has ignited in Fort Worth and nationally.

“To the citizens and residents of our city, we feel and understand your anger and your disappointment and we stand by you as we work together to make Fort Worth a better place for us all,” Fort Worth Police Sgt. Chris Daniel said during an evening press conference on October 14.

Dean, who was hired in August 2017 and became an officer nearly a year later in April 2018, is currently not cooperating with the investigation into the shooting and has not answered questions from investigators, interim Fort Worth Police Chief Ed Kraus told reporters earlier on Monday.

Kraus also said he has asked the FBI to look into the shooting for possible civil rights violations, adding that Dean would have been fired by the police department on Monday for failing to follow its policies on use of force and deescalation, and for unprofessional conduct. Police previously said that they plan to submit the camera footage and other evidence to the Tarrant County District Attorney at the end of the investigation.

The department says that despite Dean’s resignation, it will continue its internal investigation as if he were still an officer. Dean’s record will also show that he was dishonorably discharged from the department.

“None of this information can ease the pain of Atatiana’s family, but I hope it shows the community that we take these incidents seriously,” Kraus told reporters.Jefferson’s family, meanwhile, has criticized the fact that Dean was allowed to resign and has maintained calls for an independent investigation into the shooting, saying that they want justice through an “independent, thorough, and transparent process.”

“Fort Worth has a culture that has allowed this to happen,” Lee Merritt, a lawyer representing Jefferson’s family, said over the weekend. “There still needs to be a reckoning.”

The shooting of Jefferson in her own home has drawn national attention

At around 2 am local time on October 12, a neighbor of Jefferson’s called a non-emergency hotline, saying he was concerned about an open door at the woman’s residence and wanted to make sure she was okay. According to a statement released by the Fort Worth Police Department on Saturday, officers arrived at the home at around 2:25 am to respond to an “open structure call” and, after seeing the open door, walked around the perimeter of the residence.

The department said that while doing so, officers saw a person inside standing near a window. “Perceiving a threat the officer drew his duty weapon and fired one shot striking the person inside the residence,” police said.

That person was Jefferson, who was shot while standing in a bedroom. After firing, officers entered the home and began providing emergency aid, but the woman was pronounced dead at the scene.

The department also released body camera footage of the shooting, showing what happened outside of Jefferson’s home as well as the residence itself, which had a door open and the lights on inside. The video shows two officers walking around the outside of Jefferson’s home, looking into screen doors before walking into the backyard. Moving toward a closed window on the first floor, one of the officers, who has since been identified as Dean, quickly points a flashlight at it before drawing his weapon.

Dean then yells, “Put your hands up! Show me your hands!” before firing a shot less than a second later, seemingly while in the middle of repeating his commands. At no point in the released video do the men clearly identify themselves as police officers.

In addition to the statement and the body camera video, the police department also released edited footage of a firearm officers said they found at the residence, but it did not offer any additional information about where Jefferson was in relation to it or if the weapon was ever visible to the officers. Texas is an open-carry state and state residents are allowed to possess and carry firearms with few restrictions.

The initial release of the image immediately drew criticism, with observers arguing that the department was attempting to suggest that Jefferson’s weapon was relevant to her death. The police department later said that this was not its intention.

“Nobody looked at that video and said there was any doubt that this officer acted inappropriately,” Kraus later told reporters. “I get it. We’re trying to train our officers better.”

The shooting has left Fort Worth’s black residents devastated

Jefferson’s shooting, which is the seventh local police shooting involving a civilian since June 1 according to the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, has left the area’s black residents angered and confused. Community members say the shooting proves they cannot call the police for assistance.

“The Fort Worth police murdered this woman. They murdered this woman in her own house,” said Rev. Michael Bell, a local pastor who joined a group of community leaders for a Saturday press conference. “And now, African Americans, we have no recourse. If we call the police, they will come and kill us. And we know that.”

A similar fear was echoed by James Smith, the neighbor of Jefferson’s who called police after noticing the open door and lights at her home, saying he was concerned about Jefferson and her 8-year-old nephew. “I’m shaken. I’m mad. I’m upset. And I feel it’s partly my fault,” he told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram on October 12. “If I had never dialed the police department, she’d still be alive.”

In audio of Smith’s call released by the police department on Sunday, the man can be heard telling a police operator that the doors of the home had been open since 10 pm Friday and that he was concerned because he did not see any movement in the house.“I don’t know what went on in the house, but I know that she wasn’t a threat,” Smith later told reporters.

The shooting of Jefferson, who was born in Dallas and graduated from Louisiana’s Xavier University in 2014 with a biology degree, has quickly drawn comparisons to the 2018 shooting of Botham Jean, a 26-year-old black man fatally shot by former off-duty Dallas officer Amber Guyger as he ate ice cream in his apartment.

Lee Merritt, a local civil rights attorney who represents Jean’s family, is also working with Jefferson’s relatives. He said the weekend shooting is yet another example of black people being unable to live safely in their own homes.

“You didn’t hear the officer say ‘gun, gun, gun,’ you didn’t hear him — he didn’t have time to perceive a threat,” Merritt told reporters on Saturday. “That’s murder.”

“We expect a thorough and expedient investigation,” he added. A GoFundMe created by Merritt on behalf of Jefferson’s family was posted on October 13 and had collected more than $210,000 by Tuesday morning.

Before the shooting, Merritt says that Jefferson, who was called “Tay” by her loved ones, was playing video games with her nephew. The boy was in the bedroom with her when the shooting occurred, and stayed at the homes as Jefferson, who worked in pharmaceutical equipment sales and was saving money for medical school, was helping take care of the home for her sick mother, who was in the hospital at the time of the shooting.

Merritt says that when she went to the bedroom window on Saturday morning, Jefferson was concerned after hearing noise outside, adding that she was likely worried about the possibility of a prowler or burglar being near the home.

“Law enforcement has not said that she wielded a weapon,” Merritt told the New York Times on Sunday. “Also, it wouldn’t matter because that’s her home.”

Speaking to CNN that same day, Merritt said that while Jefferson’s family has spoken to local police, they want an independent agency to take over the investigation into the shooting. “We don’t think that Fort Worth police should be investigating it on their own,” he said.

The police department and city officials are working to show that they take Jefferson’s death seriously

On Sunday, the Fort Worth Police Department held a brief press conference to discuss the shooting but offered little new information about what transpired in the early morning hours of October 12.

The agency largely stuck to a prepared statement, saying that it shared the “very real and valid concerns” raised by local residents and Jefferson’s family.

“The tragic loss of life has major ramifications for all involved, especially the family of Ms. Atatiana Jefferson. We have communicated with the family and have shared our serious and heartfelt concern for this unspeakable loss,” Fort Worth Police Lt. Brandon O’Neill said.

The department did not answer questions about why it released information about a gun in Jefferson’s home and also declined to answer questions about the exact nature of the “threat” perceived by the officer.

However, the department did confirm some previous statements already made by Merritt and Smith, noting that Jefferson’s nephew was in the room with her when the shooting took place and that the officer who shot the woman did not identify himself as law enforcement before firing.

“What the officer observed, and why he did not announce ‘police,’ will be addressed as the investigation continues,” O’Neil told reporters.

On Monday, however, the department gave several additional updates, likely in an effort to mitigate concerns that the agency would protect Dean from punishment. Along with announcing Dean’s resignation, Police Chief Kraus said he regretted that the department shared images of the firearm in Jefferson’s home, saying she had every right to possess it.

“We’re homeowners in the state of Texas,” he said. “I can’t imagine most of us — if we thought we had somebody outside our house that shouldn’t be and we had access to a firearm — that we wouldn’t act very similarly to how she acted.”

Fort Worth Mayor Betsy Price has also issued several statements, including an open letter on Monday where she said that the city was “heartbroken” at Jefferson’s death. Price also denounced the initial images of a weapon in Jefferson’s home, and apologized to Jefferson’s family and to James Smith, saying that his call about his neighbor should have never culminated in her death.

In the wake of the shooting, Price says she has asked the city’s manager to hire a “third-party panel of national experts to review the police department. Everything from top to bottom.”

“Justice is critical here — but it will not bring back the life of a young woman who was taken too soon,” Price added in the letter. “This is a pivotal moment in our city, and we will act swiftly with transparency.”

Jefferson’s death has been compared to the 2018 murder of Botham Jean

News of Jefferson’s death, which comes less than two weeks after Amber Guyger was convicted of murdering Jean and sentenced to 10 years in prison, adds to already intense attention to policing in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.

In recent months, Dallas residents have voiced several concerns about the Dallas Police Department, concerns that were only intensified by evidence revealed during Guyger’s trial and by the October 4 death of Joshua Brown, a black man who testified against Guyger last month. The Dallas Police Department has condemned speculation that its officers were somehow connected to Brown’s death, saying that the man was killed in a drug deal gone bad.

According to the Washington Post’s Fatal Force database, Jefferson is one of at least 709 people who have been killed by police since the start of 2019. The database notes that 32 women have been killed by police officers this year; five of those women were black.

Speaking to reporters on Saturday, members of Jefferson’s family said that it was “inconceivable and confusing” that the woman was shot by police in her home. “It’s another one of those situations where the people that are supposed to protect us are actually not here to protect us,” Amber Carr, Jefferson’s older sister, told NBC Dallas-Fort Worth, adding that she was concerned about the training given to officers.

More concerns about the shooting were raised on Sunday evening as hundreds of people gathered for a rally and vigil on the same street as Jefferson’s home. “Systemic oppression has created risks for black people to be killed,” one attendee, Michelle Anderson, told local reporters. “We talk about state-sanctioned violence — it has always been a culture for black people. So no, it’s not about the training issue.”

Similar concerns have also been raised by national politicians, including several Democratic presidential candidates who shared Jefferson’s story on social media over the weekend.

“Being Black in your own home shouldn’t be a death sentence,” Sen. Kamala Harris tweeted on October 13. Sen. Elizabeth Warren said the shooting showed the urgent need for police reform and “federal standards for the use of force.” Sen. Bernie Sanders, meanwhile, called for a federal investigation into the shooting. Former Texas congressman Beto O’Rourke also weighed in on the latest high-profile police shooting in his home state, saying that people “must demand accountability and promise to fight until no family has to face a tragedy like this again.”

Jefferson’s family and community say they intend to do just that and will push to hold the department accountable for the shooting as the Fort Worth Police Department’s investigation continues.But the family also acknowledged that accountability will not erase the pain and trauma that the shooting has caused. “You want to see justice, but justice don’t bring my sister back,” Carr told reporters on Saturday before breaking down into tears. 

[28]

”On September 6, 2018, off-duty Dallas Police Departmentpatrol officer Amber Guyger entered the Dallas, Texas, apartment of Botham Jean and fatally shot him. Guyger said that she had entered the apartment believing it was her own and that she shot Jean believing he was a burglar.[1][2] The fact that Guyger, a white police officer, shot and killed Jean, an unarmed black man, and was initially only charged with manslaughter resulted in protests and accusations of racial bias.[3][4][5] On October 1, 2019, Guyger was found guilty of murder.[6] The next day, she received a sentence of ten years in prison”
WIKIPEDIAMURDER OF BOTHAM JEAN
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Botham_Jean
[29]

CNNAMBER GUYGER GETS TEN-YEAR MURDER SENTENCE FOR FATALLY SHOOTING BOTHAM JEAN3 OCTOBER 2019

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/10/02/us/amber-guyger-trial-sentencing/index.html

[30]

DUTCH POLICE OFFICER, WHO SHOT RISHI CHANDRIKASING, ACQUITTED/COURT GIVES POLICE LICENCE TO KILLASTRID ESSED10 JANUARY 2014
https://www.astridessed.nl/dutch-police-officer-who-shot-rishi-chandrikasing-acquittedcourt-gives-police-licence-to-kill/

[31]

CNNAMBER GUYGER GETS TEN-YEAR MURDER SENTENCE FOR FATALLY SHOOTING BOTHAM JEAN3 OCTOBER 2019

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/10/02/us/amber-guyger-trial-sentencing/index.html

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Woman shot and killed by police officer in her own home/Police violence in the USA/Another innocent victim

Opgeslagen onder Divers

Egyptian feminist Mona Eltahawy fights Islamophobia/Cancels her talk in the Islamophobic debating centre De Balie, Amsterdam

Image result for Mona Eltahawy/Images
MONA ELTAHAWY

It was one particular event that took place at De Balie (that was brought to my attention on Saturday) which began a closer look for me at the centre and made me question whether I wanted to speak there. I explain my position ??. I hope to return to soon.

7:48 AM – 22 Apr 2019

For those asking “Why cancel your appearance over one event”: 1. That “one event” was bad enough 2. That event inspired a closer look at the centre & what it represents 3. Only white people can play “free speech” & “debate all ideas” game. I am not white. This is not theoretical

 

EGYPTIAN FEMINIST MONA ELTAHAWY FIGHTS ISLAMOPHOBIA/
CANCELS HER TALK IN THE ISLAMOPHOBIC DEBATING CENTRE DE BALIE, AMSTERDAM
INTRODUCTION:
Dear Readers,
Hereby I share with you a Shout Out Letter to the Egyptian feminist Mona
Eltahawy for her cancelling of her talk in the debating centre De Balie in Amsterdam.
Background

Verder lezen

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Egyptian feminist Mona Eltahawy fights Islamophobia/Cancels her talk in the Islamophobic debating centre De Balie, Amsterdam

Opgeslagen onder Divers

[Article of John Pilger]/The Assange arrest is a warning from history

Image result for Julian Assange/Images

 

THE ASSANGE ARREST IS A WARNING FROM HISTORY

The glimpse of Julian Assange being dragged from the Ecuadorean embassy in London is an emblem of the times. Might against right. Muscle against the law. Indecency against courage. Six policemen manhandled a sick journalist, his eyes wincing against his first natural light in  almost seven years.

Verder lezen

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor [Article of John Pilger]/The Assange arrest is a warning from history

Opgeslagen onder Divers

Ripley’s Believe it or Not Musea are racist!/Letter to Ripley’s Believe it or Not Amsterdam

Sarah Baartman
La Belle Hottentot.jpg

La Belle Hottentot, a 19th-century French print of Baartman

A caricature of Baartman drawn in the early 19th century

Baartman’s exhibition poster in London

EXHIBITION AND MISUSE IN LONDON OF SARAH BAARTMAN,
THE ”HOTTENTOT VENUS” IN THE FIRST HALF
OF THE 19TH CENTURY
Image result for World Exhibition/Colonial Images
1600 × 1165Images may be subject to copyright

COLONIAL EXHIBITION MARSEILLE, 1906

Image result for colonial exhibition marseille, 1922
800 × 519Images may be subject to copyright
COLONIAL EXHIBITION MARSEILLE, 1922

Paris Colonial Exposition

COLONIAL EXHIBITION PARIS, 1931

COLONIAL EXHIBITIONS IN THE OLD DAYS….
AND LOOK!
NEO COLONIAL SHOW OFFS OF BLACK PEOPLE
IN 2018!, AS THE SHOW OFF OF ”SHRUNKEN HEADS”
SO DEHUMANIZING…..BAH!!!!!!!
Image result for ripley's s shrunken head
350 × 513Images may be subject to copyright

Ripley’s Believe It or Not! has more than 100 genuine shrunken human heads in its museums! The Jivaro tribes of South America would take the heads of fallen enemies, remove the skin whole, and shrink it to the size of a fist! Ripley’s Believe It or Not! founder Robert Ripley acquired his first genuine human shrunken head in Lima, Peru, in 1923.

Ripley’s Believe It or Not! has more than 100 genuine shrunken human heads in its museums! The Jivaro tribes of South America would take the heads of fallen enemies, remove the skin whole, and shrink it to the size of a fist! Ripley’s Believe It or Not! founder Robert Ripley acquired his first genuine human shrunken head in Lima, Peru, in 1923.

RIPLEY’S BELIEVE IT OR NOT! HAS MORE THAN 100 GENUINE SHRUNKEN HUMAN HEADS IN ITS MUSEUMS! THE JIVARO TRIBES OF SOUTH AMERICA WOULD TAKE THE HEADS OF FALLEN ENEMIES, REMOVE THE SKIN WHOLE, AND SHRINK IT TO THE SIZE OF A FIST! RIPLEY’S BELIEVE IT OR NOT! FOUNDER ROBERT RIPLEY ACQUIRED HIS FIRST GENUINE HUMAN SHRUNKEN HEAD IN LIMA, PERU, IN 1923.

https://www.ripleys.com/weird- news/guide-2012-heads/

COLONIAL EXHIBITION IN 2018!!!!!!!

 

 

 

RIPLEY’S BELIEVE IT OR NOT MUSEA ARE RACIST!/LETTER
TO RIPLEY’S  ”BELIEVE IT OR NOT” AMSTERDAM
RIPLEY’S MUSEUM
”BELIEVE IT OR NOT”
AMSTERDAM
TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND
MANAGEMENT

 

Subject:
Your total lack of respect for non-western
people
Dear Directors and Management,
Sitting at a station at saturday 28th of april I could NOT
believe my eyes, seeing a billboard with a man in a
colonial sun helmet, holding
a shrunken head in his hand,, apparently from some non-western human
being.
When I looked further I saw an image of a native American man
[or woman, that was not visible] with an abnormal long neck
[obviously fotoshopped for fun!] with a fabricated African necklace
on the abnormal neck,
playing a guitar, that ended in a sort of animal with two heads.
On her/his head he [or she] wore a sort of headdress, consisting
of all non-western cultural symbols in the world [feathers, woollen balls, etc]

Verder lezen

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Ripley’s Believe it or Not Musea are racist!/Letter to Ripley’s Believe it or Not Amsterdam

Opgeslagen onder Divers

Palestinian human rights activist Issa Amro arrested over a Facebook post/Letter to the Palestinian mission in the Hague

Image result

ISSA AMRO, NON VIOLENT HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDER
AND CITIZEN OF HEBRON, WHO IS ARRESTED BY THE
SECURITY TROOPS OF THE PALESTINIAN GOVERNMENT
FOR HIS FACEBOOK POSTS ABOUT THE ARREST OF
ANOTHER JOURNALIST!
 
 
 
 
 
 
THE ACTIVITIES OF ISSA AMRO:
PROTESTING THE ILLEGAL ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS
 
 
Image result for settlements/Images
MR AMRO IS FIGHTING THE RIGHT STRUGGLE AGAINST THE
ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS IN OCCUPIED TERRITORIES,
WHICH ARE ILLEGAL ACCORDING INTERNATIONAL LAW
Image result for Hebron settlements/Photo
MR ISSA AMRO IS LIVING IN HEBRON, WHERE HE FIGHTS HIS
FIGHT AGAINST AGRRESSIVE SETTLERS, WHO TERRORIZE
THE PALESTINIAN CIVILIAN POPULATION
PALESTINIAN HUMAN RIGHTS ACTIVIST ARRESTED OVER
A FACEBOOK POST/LETTER TO THE PALESTINIAN MISSION
IN THE HAGUE
TO THE PALESTINIAN MISSION IN THE HAGUE/THE NETHERLANDS
Mrs Rawan Sulaiman, ambassador
Subject: The arrest of mr Issa Amro by the security troops of
the Palestinian Authority
”Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”
ARTICLE 19, UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

 

 

Verder lezen

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Palestinian human rights activist Issa Amro arrested over a Facebook post/Letter to the Palestinian mission in the Hague

Opgeslagen onder Divers