Friedman, Trump’s longtime bankruptcy lawyer, was referring to a Security Council resolution which, in fact, emphasizes “the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war” and calls for Israel’s withdrawal from territory occupied in the 1967 War.Friedman’s interpretation directly contradicts numerous subsequent resolutions that explicitly reaffirm the illegality of Israel’s settlements in the West Bank.Israel’s transfer of its civilian population to territory it occupies is a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention and is thus a war crime.Friedman, incidentally, is a major bankroller of one such settlement.
The Petah Tikva municipality disconnected dozens of apartments where African asylum seekers were living from electricity, the mayor doesn’t like seeing black people in public, and casual racism has a common occurrence. Faisal, a refugee from Darfur, describes what it’s like to live in a city where he is unwanted.
Adam Collins, a spokesman for Mayor Rahm Emanuel, said on Friday night that city officials had not been told about the plans for additional federal agents but that the mayor would be glad for their help.“We have received no word from the federal government to confirm these reports, but it would be welcome news if the administration has indeed agreed to one of Mayor Emanuel’s requests for federal resources,” Mr. Collins said. “We remain hopeful that they will also provide added D.E.A. and F.B.I. agents, that they will boost the prosecution rate for federal gun crimes in Chicago, and that they will provide funding for successful violence prevention efforts.”
As President Trump signs executive orders on International Holocaust Remembrance Day, suspending refugee admissions for 120 days, indefinitely blocking all Syrian refugees, blocking entry to the US from seven countries, and limiting the amount of refugees, the White House statement from earlier in the day rings hollow. The statement reads, “it is impossible to fully fathom the depravity and horror” of the Nazi regime and we know that the depravity and horror of war is still alive in Syria and other war-torn countries that carefully vetted refugees are escaping from. As an organization that cares about the most vulnerable in our society and believes in promoting nonviolent, peaceful resolutions to conflicts, we at the Intercommunity Justice and Peace Center oppose any plan to reduce refugee admissions, especially a plan that explicitly targets and excludes Muslims from being resettled in the United States. We advocate strongly against policy changes that deny refugees access based on their religion or country of origin.As people of faith, we must welcome the stranger, welcome people who are suffering, and provide for those who are fleeing war, terror, and persecution. This is central to the message of the Gospel and a core Christian belief. Promoting racist and xenophobic messages, by equating all members of one religion to a radical sect, is dangerous and misguided.IJPC is proud to work in solidarity, peace, and justice alongside CAIR and with the Muslim community. We stand in resistance to President Trump’s executive orders and divisive rhetoric against refugees and their allies.Please call your Member of Congress and share your concerns with them. Tell them that we believe refugees and Muslims are welcome in our community.
On this issue one must repeat today what was true yesterday, the day before, and every day since 1967: the idea of settling for the purpose of marking territory — based on a worldview based on belligerence and supremacy — while placing a civilian population under military rule, is ugly and unsustainable. This worldview has been held by decent, realistic Israelis for 50 years. There is no chance for the apartheid model as embodied by the settlements, which grant their Jewish residents excessive privileges over the Palestinians.The greatest harm caused by the settlements is vis-a-vis Israelis and Judaism: they force the state to constantly deepen its hatred and fear of Arabs. Anger and fear, after all, are what raise a generation of soldiers and settlers who will maintain the mechanisms of settlement and occupation. Without anger and fear, there is nothing.Beyond the issue itself, there is the story of the settlements and the coalition of Prime Minister Netanyahu and Education Minister Naftali Bennett, which decided in the past few years to break the rules of the game when it comes to the occupied territories. No longer does Israel tread lightly and form alliances to ensure a facade of the status quo. This approach, one of the defining characteristics of the Zionist movement since its inception, has been replaced with arrogant ranting and biblical quotes, all while showing the world exactly how powerful we are.
The spectre of violent extremism is being used to repress legitimate dissent. In Israel, the agreement with Facebook appears to legitimize an Israeli policy that in recent months has resulted in an estimated 400 arrests of Palestinians—both in Israel and the Occupied Territories—for “incitement” in social media posts, primarily on Facebook. Posts have included acts as simple as writing a poem. States pressure private companies to engage in such agreements through shaming or “demonizing,” as well as threats of blocking, fines, or even imprisonment of company executives. They often justify this pressure by citing the companies’ own voluntary and proprietary terms of service and community standards, whose definitions of permissible speech are narrower than those encoded in their own constitutions or in the International Covenant on Civil Political Rights (ICCPR). For instance, the Israeli announcement of the agreement with Facebook came amid reports of “proposed legislation that seeks to force social networks to remove content that Israel considers to be incitement.” Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)—to which Israel is a party—permits states to limit an individual’s freedom of expression only under select circumstances, including to protect the rights or reputations of others, national security, public order, public health, or morals. These limits, however, must first meet a three-part test as defined by the ICCPR: the limits must (1) be defined by law, (2) have legitimate aim, and (3) be truly necessary. Not only does strong-arming a social media company to censor its users according to its own policies meet no such test, it also precludes real accountability of either the company or the government to its users or citizens. Israel is not alone; agreements between social media companies and the European Commission and government of Germany have made headlines and have been widely criticized by human and digital rights organizations. Nevertheless, social media companies also have an obligation to stand up to such pressuring and to make public when they are being asked to contravene the law.
More than 1,000 members of faculty have condemned a website that blacklists students and educators who criticize Israel.“We reject the McCarthyist tactics used by Canary Mission,” the scholars say in a statement initiated by students.“We urge our fellow admissions faculty, as well as university administrators, prospective employers and all others, to join us in … standing against such bullying and attempts to shut down civic engagement and freedom of speech,” the scholars add.The aim of the shadowy website, Canary Mission, is to punish students for their activism by harming their future academic and professional careers.Its anonymous administrators contact potential employers and graduate student admissions committees, claiming that the students are engaged in anti-Semitic bigotry and sympathy towards terrorism.The site is part of an increasing wave of tactics by right-wing groups on US campuses intending to silence criticism of Israel.
Jerusalem is divided between different people – leftists and rightists, secular and religious – these definitions erect walls and restrict our humanity. At the end of the day, when you talk to someone on the level and do it genuinely you realize that we all have a lot in common, even when we disagree with each other, which is fine. They look different and they think different, but we must respect each other, we are all the sons of one god.
I then shed all my prejudice and the preconceptions that I had, having grown up in Jerusalem during the Second Intifada, having seen blown-up buses and thought every Arab was a terrorist. Many times in my life I incited and acted against Arabs.
And today, three years on, I’m coming full circle. I’m going to meet with Mohammed Ghadir, shake his hand talk to him. I’m the happiest man alive.
I’ve recently started speaking against racism and for love and tolerance. Many eyebrows were raised. I was harassed along the way, and many are still annoyed with me.
But when I see kids that thanks to me choose love over hate, I couldn’t be happier. I have made lovely Arab, religious, secular, ultra-Orthodox friends, really of all kinds. I’m trying to shed my prejudices and be sensitive, empathetic, loving and accepting. I’ve shed all the fears that I had. I’ve won.”Later, after he met with Ghadir, he wrote another post describing the meeting as “one of the most emotional moments of my life.”
Looking back, Mr. Trump’s response to the lawsuit can be seen as presaging his handling of subsequent challenges, in business and in politics. Rather than quietly trying to settle — as another New York developer had done a couple of years earlier — he turned the lawsuit into a protracted battle, complete with angry denials, character assassination, charges that the government was trying to force him to rent to “welfare recipients” and a $100 million countersuit accusing the Justice Department of defamation.When it was over, Mr. Trump declared victory, emphasizing that the consent decree he ultimately signed did not include an admission of guilt.But an investigation by The New York Times — drawing on decades-old files from the New York City Commission on Human Rights, internal Justice Department records, court documents and interviews with tenants, civil rights activists and prosecutors — uncovered a long history of racial bias at his family’s properties, in New York and beyond.That history has taken on fresh relevance with Mr. Trump arguing that black voters should support him over Hillary Clinton, whom he has called a bigot.While there is no evidence that Mr. Trump personally set the rental policies at his father’s properties, he was on hand while they were in place, working out of a cubicle in Trump Management’s Brooklyn offices as early as the summer of 1968.Then and now, Mr. Trump has steadfastly denied any awareness of any discrimination at Trump properties. While Mr. Trump declined to be interviewed for this article, his general counsel, Alan Garten, said in a statement that there was “no merit to the allegations.” And there has been no suggestion of racial bias toward prospective residents in the luxury housing that Mr. Trump focused on as his career took off in Manhattan in the 1980s.In the past, Mr. Trump has treated the case as a footnote in the narrative of his career. In his memoir “The Art of the Deal,” he dispensed with it in five paragraphs. And while stumping in Ohio, he even singled out his work at one of his father’s properties in Cincinnati, omitting that, at the time, the development was the subject of a separate discrimination lawsuit — one that included claims of racial slurs uttered by a manager whom Mr. Trump had personally praised.