Archive for the ‘Europe’ Category

Cameron likes private Israeli security orgs

‘With me you have a prime minister whose belief in Israel is indestructible’, David Cameron assured over a thousand supporters of a private security organisation that polices the English Jewish communities.  While his commitment has long been common knowledge, his word choice underscores the need for concern.

When we say we ‘believe in’ something, we are making a personal value judgement.  Whether we ‘believe in’ God, or we ‘believe in’ drinking five litres of water a day, the phrase means that we think the concept is valid.  The British Prime Minister’s word choice points to a political phenomenon: Israel has never been a traditional state as much as it has been an ethos.  From the beginning, the Israeli project has been an ideology imposed at the expense of those whose only fault was to have been caught unawares on a coveted land. 

Indeed the whole of Cameron’s speech, which can be read here http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/46044/david-camerons-speech-cst, exudes a passion for a conceptual people under siege.  Cameron thus describes his belief in the Israeli project as ‘indestructible’—defensively and defiantly ‘indestructible’. 

The need for concern lies with his personal adulation dictating the terms of his political management.  Certainly, to guarantee equal rights for English people of all religious faiths is admirable.  But throughout his speech Cameron equates ‘Jewish’ with ‘Israeli’—as if all London Jews were pro-Israeli (they are not) and as if all Israelis were Jewish (they are not).   Such a stance discredits both demographics.  Likewise, his promise that he ‘will always be an advocate for the State of Israel’ denies the possibility of a conflict of interest with his sworn duty as Prime Minister to be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth: to be an advocate for the United Kingdom.

Equally as worrisome, though, is the Prime Minister’s characterisation of the recent upheavals in the Arab world.  Cameron notes that ‘this instability may seem a cause for concern for Israel’, but he then shrewdly reassures his audience.  This is a ‘precious moment of opportunity’, he says.  ‘We want to see Israel driving the process, which means seizing the initiative.  Doing so is absolutely vital’.

Vital to whom?  Is it vital to the Libyan people against whom Muammar and Saif al-Islam Gaddafi are using mercenary weapons outsourced from similar Israeli ‘security firms’?  No, not vital, but lethal to those seeking redress.

Cameron devotes a significant portion of his speech to discussing the Arab uprisings as an ‘opportunity’ for Israel and its Western patrons to remake the region to better suit themselves.  This myopic exploitation typifies the pattern of defining all matters and all peoples of the Greater Middle East in terms of the Western-Israeli Alliance. 

A spirit of entitlement and superiority has for many long and bloody years pervaded Western foreign policies.  Many of those who have been suffocated by such attitudes have at last realised that they deserve to decide for themselves their own business.

A state is a dynamic entity.  No state comprises people of identical values.  Its success lies in achieving a balance in the cultural expression of those values.   But this balance cannot be imposed.  It can be determined only by the people themselves. 

The Arab peoples have had enough of the condescending advisories from those who have their strategic eye on Aladdin’s cave.  The Arab peoples do not need the dubious money-maker George Soros to sort out on the BBC the Arabs’ handling of their own natural resources.  Nor do they need David Cameron’s vision of ‘stability and security for all.’  Because his vision is simply not for all.  He said it himself: he will always be an advocate for the State of Israel. 

The seemingly contagious quests for Arab autonomy throughout the region have been propelled by people who want and need and demand a voice.  Their own voice.  The uprisings are neither pro-Westernism, nor anti-Westernism.  Rather, the uprisings are about self-respect.  The uprisings are resistance to imposed ideologies.  Let us be clear: the region is not for sale.

www.english.moqawama.org

Originally posted at http://english.moqawama.org/essaydetails.php?eid=13593&cid=269  

Photo from http://thecst.org.uk/blog/?p=2359   

Houria Bouteldja from "Indigenes de la Republique"

 from Kasama Project A Maoist sister in Spain, LG, sent us the following posting. She wrote as an introduction:

This very controversial  essay is by Houria Bouteldja, the spokesperson for the political party organized by people of color in France called Les Indigenes de la Republique. This group is composed by people born and raised in France whose families come from the French ex-colonies. The majority of the members are French from African, Caribbean and Arab origin.

The essay caused a lot of interesting debates because it is a critique to Western Feminism from a Third World Feminist perspective. The essay was also translated to many languages by the Decolonial Translation group.

The term “indigenous” in the French context is used very differently from the Americas. In the Americas, the indigenous are aboriginal or native people. In France, indigenous means “colonial subjects of the French empire.” Indigenous was the term used by the French empire during colonial times to refer to colonial populations everywhere (Viet Nam, Algeria, Tunisia, Martinique, Guadaloupe, Senegal, etc.).

This French party, composed primarily by people of color but open to everybody, appropriated the term “indigenous” from French colonial history to basically say that even though they are French (born and raised in France), due to racism, capitalism and imperialism, they are still treated inside France as “indigenous of the Republic,” that is, as colonial subjects.

It is a way of saying, we are still living in colonial times even though we live in France. Thus, their openly stated goal is to decolonize France. They do a Decolonial march every year in Paris on May 8th. This is the day of the liberation of France in 1944 from the Nazi occupation and the day of the Seti massacre in Algeria. What happened was that while the French went to the streets to celebrate, the Algerians in Seti (a small city of Algeria) also went to the streets to celebrate and to call for Algerian independence. The response of the French colonial army was to kill everybody in the Seti demonstration. So, the indigenous of the Republique do this Decolonial march every year to remind that France is in need of radical decolonization. I was once in one of these marches and it is surreal. You could see thousands of French people-of-color in a demonstration through the streets of Paris with huge Photos of Aime Cesaire, Frantz Fanon, Amircal Cabral, Angela Davis, Malcolm X, Kwame Nkhruma, Nelson Mandela, Nasrallah, Nasser, etc.

Anyway, here is the essay, which was delivered as a speech to the 4th International Congress of Islamic Feminism that took place in Madrid, in October 2010. It appeared in English on Decolonial Translation:

 

Les Indigenes de la Republique

 

White women and the privilege of solidarity

by Houria Bouteldja

I would, first of all, like to thank the Junta Islamica Catalana for having organized this colloquium, which is a real breath of fresh air in a Europe that is shriveling up in upon itself, wrought up in xenophobic debates and increasingly rejecting difference/alterity.

I hope that such an initiative will be able to take place in France. Before getting into the subject at hand, I would like to introduce myself, as I believe that speech should always be located.

I live in France, I am the daughter of Algerian immigrants. My father was a working class man and my mother was a housewife. I am not speaking as a sociologist, a researcher or a theologian. In other words, I am no expert.

I am an activist and I am speaking as a result of my experience as a political activist and, I might add, my own personal sensibility. I am insisting on these details because I would like to be as honest as possible in my reasoning. Truth be told, until today, I hadn’t really thought about the question of Islamic feminism. So why am I taking part in this colloquium? When I was invited, I made it quite clear that I lacked the authority to speak about Islamic feminism and that I would rather deal with the idea of decolonial feminism and the ways in which, I believe, it should be related to the more general question of Islamic feminism.

That is why I thought I would lay out a few questions that could prove useful for our collective questioning.

  • Is feminism universal?
  • What is the relationship between white/Western feminisms and Third World feminisms among which we find Islamic feminisms?
  • Is feminism compatible with Islam?
  • If it is, then how can it be legitimized and what would its priorities be?

First Question: Is feminism universal?

For me, it is the question of all questions when adopting a decolonial approach and when attempting to decolonize feminism. This question is essential, not because of the answer but rather because it makes us, we who live in the West, take the necessary precautions when we are confronted with ‘Other’ societies.

Let’s take, for example, so-called Western societies that witnessed the emergence of feminist movements and have been influenced by them. The women who fought against patriarchy in favor of an equal dignity between men and women gained rights and improved women’s circumstances, which I, myself, benefit from.

Let’s compare their situation, that is to say our situation, with that of so-called “primitive” societies in Amazonia for instance. There are still societies here and there that have been spared by Western influence. I should add here that I don’t consider any society to be primitive. I think there are differing spaces/times on our planet, different temporalities, that no civilization is in advance or behind on any other, that I don’t locate myself on a scale of progress and that I don’t consider progress an end in itself nor a political goal.

In other words, I don’t necessarily consider progress to be progressive but sometimes, even often, it is regressive. And, I think that the decolonial question can also be applied to our perception of time. Getting back to the subject at hand, if we take as our criteria the simple notion of well-being, who in this room can state that the women from those societies (who know nothing of the concept of feminism as we conceive of it) are less well-off than European women who not only took part in the struggles but also made available, to their societies, these invaluable social gains?

I, myself, find it quite impossible to answer this question and would consider quite fortunate whoever could. But yet again, the answer is of no importance. The question itself is, for it humbles us, and curbs our imperialist tendencies as well as our interfering reflexes. It prevents us from considering our own norms as universal and trying to make other’s realities fit into our own. In short, it makes us locate ourselves with regards to our own particularities.

Between Western & Third World feminisms

Having laid out that question clearly, I now feel more at ease to tackle the second question dealing with the relationship between Western feminisms and Third World feminisms. Obviously it’s very complicated but one of its dimensions is the domination of the global south by the global north. A decolonial approach should question this relationship and attempt to subvert it. An example:

In 2007, women from the Movement of the Indigenous of the Republic took part in the annual 8th of March demonstration in support of women’s struggles. At that time, the American campaign against Iran had begun. We decided to march behind a banner that’s message was “No feminism without anti-imperialism”. We were all wearing Palestinian kaffiyehs and handing out flyers in support of three resistant Iraqi women taken prisoner by the Americans. When we arrived, the organizers of the official procession started chanting slogans in support of Iranian women. We found these slogans extremely shocking given the ideological offensive against Iran at that time. Why the Iranians, the Algerians and not the Palestinians and the Iraqis? Why such selective choices? To thwart these slogans, we decided to express our solidarity not with Third World women but rather with Western women. And so we chanted:

Solidarity with Swedish women!

Solidarity with Italian women!

Solidarity with German women!

Solidarity with English women!

Solidarity with French women!

Solidarity with American women!

Which meant:

Why should you, white women, have the privilege of solidarity? You are also battered, raped, you are also subject to men’s violence, you are also underpaid, despised, your bodies are also instrumentalized…

I can tell you that they looked at us as if we were from outer space. What we were saying seemed surreal, inconceivable. It was like the 4th dimension.  It wasn’t so much the fact that we reminded them of their situation as Western women that shocked them. It was more the fact that African and Arabo-Muslim women had dared symbolically subvert a relationship of domination and had established themselves as patrons. In other words, with this skillful rhetorical turn, we showed them that they de facto had a superior status to our own. We found their looks of disbelief quite entertaining.

Another example: After a solidarity trip to Palestine, a friend was telling me how the French women had asked the Palestinian women if they used birth control. According to my friend, the Palestinian women couldn’t understand such a question given how important the demographic issue is in Palestine. They were coming from a completely different perspective. For many Palestinian women, having children is an act of resistance against the ethnic cleansing policies of the Israeli state.

There you have two examples that illustrate our situation as racialized women, that help understand what is at stake and envisage a way to fight colonialist and Eurocentric feminism.

Following on from that question, is Islam compatible with feminism?

This question is purely provocative on my behalf. I can’t stand it. I am asking this question to imitate some French journalist who believes they are asking a really pertinent question. As for me, I refuse to answer out of principle.

On the one hand, because it comes from a position of arrogance. The representative of civilization X is demanding that the representative of civilization Y prove something. Y is, therefore, put in dock and must provide proof of her/his “modern-ness”, justify her/him-self to please X.

On the other hand, because the answer is not simple when one knows that the Islamic world is not monolithic. The debate could go on forever and that is exactly what happens when you make the mistake of trying to answer.

Myself, I cut to the chase by asking X the following question:Is the French Republic compatible with feminism?

I can guarantee you one thing: ideological victory is in the answer to this question. In France, 1 woman dies every 3 days as a result of domestic violence. The number rapes per year is estimated around 48 000. Women are underpaid. Women’s pensions are considerably less substantial than those of men. Political, economic and symbolic power remains mostly in the hands of men. True, since the 60’s and 70’s, men share more in household duties: statistically, 3 min more than 30 years ago!! So I ask my question again: are the French Republic and feminism compatible? We would be tempted to say no!

Actually, the answer is neither yes nor no. French women liberated French women and it’s thanks to them that the Republic is less macho than it was. The same goes for Arabo-Muslim, African and Asian countries. No more, no less. With, however, one extra challenge: consolidating within women’s struggles the decolonial dimension, that is to say the critique of modernity and eurocentrism.

How to legitimize Islamic feminism?

For me, it legitimizes itself. It doesn’t have to pass a feminist exam. The simple fact that Muslim women have taken it up to demand their rights and their dignity is enough for it to be fully recognized. I know, as result of my intimate knowledge of women from the Maghreb and in the diaspora, that “the-submissive-woman” does not exist. She was invented. I know women that are dominated. Submissive ones are rarer!

I would like to conclude with what, in my opinion, should be priorities for decolonial feminism.

You have all heard about Amina Wadud and her involvement in the development of Islamic feminism. She became well known the day she lead the prayer, a role usually reserved for men. Out of context, I would say that it could be thought of as a revolutionary act. However, in an international context that saw the Iranian Revolution and 9/11 (as well as growing Islamophobia, demands that Islam update and modernize itself), a much more ambiguous message was brought to light. Was it answering strong demands, an urgency, the fundamental expectations of women from the Umma? Or were these expectations of the white world? Allow me to dwell on the latter hypothesis. Not that there aren’t any women who find it an injustice that only men be allowed to lead the prayer but because women’s priorities and urgent needs are elsewhere.

What do Afghan, Iraqi and Palestinian women want? Peace, the end of the war and the occupation, the rebuilding of their national infrastructures, legal frameworks that guarantee their rights and protect them, access to sufficient food and water, the ability to feed and educate their children under good conditions. What do Muslim women in Europe and more generally those who are immigrants and who, for the most part, live in lower income neighborhoods want? A job, housing, rights that protect them not only from state violence but also men’s violence. They demand respect for their religion, their culture. Why are all of these demands silenced and why does the issue of leading the prayer make its way across the globe when Judaism and Christianity have never really made apparent their own intransigent defense of the equality of sexes? To finish up with this example, I believe that Amina Wadud’s act was, in fact, quite the opposite of what it claimed to be. In reality and independently of the theologian’s own wishes, this act, in my opinion, was counter-productive. It will only be able to adopt a feminist dimension once Islam is equally treated with respect and once the demands to lead the prayer come from Muslim women themselves. It is time to see Muslim men and women how they really are and not how we would like them to be.

I conclude here and hope to have shown the ways in which a true decolonial feminism could benefit women, all women when they, themselves, deem it to be their path to emancipation.

Houria Bouteldja, Madrid, 22 October 2010.

Translated by Amy Fechtmann

Στο όνομα του Αραβικού Παλαιστινιακού λαού, του αίματος των μαρτύρων, των χηρών και των υστερημένων, των ορφανών και των χιλιάδων φυλακισμένων στις Ισραηλινές φυλακές και όλων των απόδημων Παλαιστινίων, καλούμε όλες τις Παλαιστινιακές παρατάξεις να ενωθούν υπό το λάβαρο της Παλαιστίνης, προκειμένου να μεταρρυθμιστεί το πολιτικό σύστημα στην Παλαιστίνη στη βάση των συμφερόντων και των φιλοδοξιών (οραμάτων) των Παλαιστινίων στην πατρίδα και τη διασπορά.

Η σοβαρότητα της Ισραηλινής αποικιακής εισβολής στην παρούσα φάση, η αρπαγή των εδαφών της ιερής μας Ιερουσαλήμ και η βίαιη πολιορκία εναντίον του λαού της Γάζας, απαιτεί από όλους μας να αντισταθούμε σε αυτή την βάναυση κατοχή.

Έχουμε ακούσει πως ο Παλαιστινιακός λαός ζητά νομοθετικές και προεδρικές εκλογές προκειμένου να λήξει το καθεστώς διάσπασης. Ναι, όλοι θέλουμε να βάλουμε ένα τέλος στη διάσπαση, αλλά θέλουμε επίσης την πλήρη αναδόμηση και μεταρρύθμιση της Οργάνωσης για την Απελευθέρωση της Παλαιστίνης (PLO), ώστε να περιλαμβάνει όλες τις αποχρώσεις του παλαιστινιακού πολιτικού φάσματος, της Hamas συμπεριλαμβανομένης, προκειμένου να παλέψουμε πάλι για την απελευθέρωση της Παλαιστίνης όπως προορίστηκε αρχικά.

Εμείς, οι Παλαιστίνιοι στην πατρίδα και στο εξωτερικό, πάντα ακούγαμε ότι οι ειρηνικές ενέργειες θα επετύγχαναν τη νίκη και θα αποκαθιστούσαν τα εδάφη μας αλλά 20 χρόνια διαπραγματεύσεων δεν έχουν επιτύχει ούτε τις ελάχιστες απαιτήσεις. Οι συνάνθρωποι μας παραμένουν υπό τη βάναυση και καταπιεστική κατοχή που υφαρπάζει τα εδάφη μας, παραβιάζει τους ιερούς τόπους και σκοτώνει τα παιδιά μας, και όλα αυτά ενώ η οικουμένη, που απαιτεί δημοκρατία και σεβασμό των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων, απλά παρατηρεί και ακούει! Ενώ παράλληλα, η αντίσταση χρονοτριβεί, αφήνοντας περισσότερο από ενάμιση εκατομμύριο Παλαιστίνιους υπό τον ισραηλινό αποκλεισμό που τους πνίγει σε τέτοιο βαθμό που παραπέμπει ακόμα και ασθενείς στο εξωτερικό προκειμένου να τους παραχθεί θεραπεία, την ίδια στιγμή που αυτό είναι πρακτικά αδύνατο να γίνει, ακόμα και για τους ίδιους τους ηγέτες της αντίστασης και των οικογενειών τους, πόσο μάλλον για τον υπόλοιπο Παλεστινιακό λαό.

Πρέπει να συμφωνήσουμε πως είναι απαραίτητο όλοι μας να ενωθούμε για τους απανταχού Παλαιστίνιους, που ακόμη ονειρεύονται την επιστροφή έξι εκατομμύριων Παλαιστίνιων προσφύγων στις κατοικίες τους που καταπατήθηκαν κατά την κατοχή, μια κατοχή που αντιλαμβάνεται μόνο τη γλώσσα της βίας!

Ας γίνουμε δυνατοί, ας είναι η ενότητα η δύναμή μας, και ας συμφωνήσουμε ομόφωνα σε μια ενοποιημένη ηγεσία που θα μας οδηγήσει στην ελευθερία με υπερηφάνεια και αξιοπρέπεια!

Από αυτή τη θέση, καλούμε τις κυβερνήσεις της Δυτικής Όχθης και της Γάζας να ανταποκριθούν στα νόμιμα αιτήματα των ανθρώπων:
1. Την απελευθέρωση όλων των πολιτικών κρατουμένων από τις φυλακές της Παλαιστινιακής Αρχής και της Hamas.
2. Το τέλος της μεταξύ τους δημόσιας αντιπαράθεσης.
3. Την παραίτηση των κυβερνήσεων του Haniyeh και του Fayyad και τον σχηματισμό μίας κυβέρνησης εθνικής ενότητας που θα συμφωνηθεί από όλες τις παλαιστινιακές παρατάξεις και θα είναι αντιπροσωπευτική του Παλαιστινιακού λαού.
4. Την αναδιάρθρωση της Οργάνωσης για την Απελευθέρωση της Παλαιστίνης, που θα περιέχει όλες τις παλαιστινιακές παρατάξεις και την επιστροφή της στον αρχικό στόχο: την Ελευθερία της Παλαιστίνης
5. Την ανακοίνωση περί αναστολής όλων των διαπραγματεύσεων μέχρι την πλήρη συμφωνία ενός πολιτικού προγράμματος από τις διάφορες παλαιστινιακές παρατάξεις
6. Το τέλος κάθε μορφής συντονισμού σε θέματα ασφάλειας με το σιωνιστή εχθρό
7. Την οργάνωση προεδρικών και κοινοβουλευτικών εκλογών ταυτόχρονα, σε χρόνο που θα συμφωνηθεί από όλες τις παρατάξεις

Οι εκδηλώσεις θα ξεκινήσουν την Τρίτη, 15 Μαρτίου 2011, στις 11:30 π.μ. και θα συνεχιστούν μέχρι την επίτευξη όλων των στόχων.
Θα μαζευτούμε στις ακόλουθες τοποθεσίες (αλλαγές είναι πιθανόν να υπάρξουν):
Γάζα: Πλατεία Αγνώστου Στρατιώτη (Gaza: the Unknown Soldier Square)
Ραμάλλα: Πλατεία Manara (Ramallah: Manara Square)
Τουλκάρμ: Κυκλική Πλατεία Gamal Abdel Nasser (Tulkarm: Roundabout Gamal Abdel Nasser)
Τζενίν: στο συγκρότημα των χώρων στάθμευσης κοντά στον παλαιό κινηματογράφο Jenin (Jenin: complex of garages near the old Cinema Jenin)
Χεβρώνα: μπροστά στο κυβερνείο (Hebron: in front of the governor’s office)
Βηθλεέμ: Εκκλησία της πλατείας Nativity (Bethlehem: Church of the Nativity Square)
Nablus: Πλατεία Μαρτύρων (Nablus: Martyrs Square)
Ιορδανία και Λίβανος: η τοποθεσία δεν έχει οριστεί ακόμα
Στον υπόλοιπο κόσμο: μπροστά από τις Παλαιστινιακές πρεσβείες, σε συνεννόηση με τις παλαιστινιακές κοινότητες στο εξωτερικό. ΘΑ ΑΚΟΛΟΥΘΗΣΕΙ ΑΝΑΚΟΙΝΩΣΗ !!!

Παρακαλούμε επισκεφτείτε μας στην σελίδα:
http://www.facebook.com/Palestinians.United?sk=info

15 marzo, Azione internazionale per l’unità del Popolo Palestinese.
Un solo popolo contro il Sionismo.

In nome del popolo arabo palestinese, per il rispetto del sangue dei martiri, delle vedove, degli orfani e dei loro lutti, per le migliaia di prigionieri nelle carceri israeliane e per tutta la nostra gente della diaspora palestinese, chiediamo a tutte le fazioni di unirsi sotto la bandiera della Palestina per potere riformare e basare il sistema politico in Palestina sugli interessi ed aspirazioni del popolo palestinese, in patria e in esilio.

La gravità dell’attuale fase di incursioni da parte dei coloni israeliani, dell’appropriazione della terra nella nostra Sacra Gerusalemme e della violenza dell’assedio contro il popolo palestinese di Gaza obbliga tutti noi ad unirci saldamente contro quest’occupazione brutale.

Noi abbiamo sentito il popolo palestinese chiedere le elezioni legislative e presidenziali per porre fine alla divisione. Sì, tutti noi vogliamo la fine della divisione, ma vogliamo anche una totale ricostruzione dell’ Organizzazione per la Liberazione della Palestina, che comprenda tutti i colori dello spettro politico palestinese, incluso Hamas, e di riformarla con lo scopo di lottare di nuovo per la liberazione della Palestina, così come era stato inteso dalla sua fondazione.

Noi, il popolo palestinese, in patria ed in esilio, abbiamo sempre sentito che le azioni pacifiche sarebbero bastate per ottenere la vittoria e ci avrebbero restituito la nostra terra, ma 20 anni di negoziati non ci hanno fatto ottenere la benché minima richiesta. La nostra gente vive sotto una brutale ed oppressiva occupazione che saccheggia la nostra terra, viola i nostri luoghi sacri, uccide i nostri figli. Fa tutto questo mentre il mondo dichiara che la democrazia è assicurata e i diritti umani vengono rispettati! D’altro canto la resistenza è in stallo, mentre più di un milione e mezzo di palestinesi restano sotto l’assedio israeliano che strangola fino al punto che i nostri malati, compresi i figli dei leader della resistenza, possono essere curati solo altrove.

Dobbiamo essere d’accordo: è necessario che noi ci uniamo per tutti i palestinesi qui e per i sei milioni di rifugiati palestinesi in ogni parte del mondo che ancora sognano il loro ritorno alle loro case sottratte dall’Occupazione, che comprende soltanto il linguaggio della forza! Dobbiamo essere forti, dobbiamo fare sì che l’unità sia la nostra forza e che siamo unanimemente concordi su una dirigenza che ci potrebbe guidare fino alla libertà, con orgoglio e dignità!

Con questo appello chiediamo a tutti coloro che governano in Cisgiordania e Gaza di rispondere alle richieste legittime del popolo:
1 – il rilascio di tutti i detenuti politici nelle prigioni dell’ Autorità Palestinese e di Hamas
2 – la fine di ogni tipo di campagna stampa contro le altre fazioni
3 – le dimissioni dei governi di Haniyeh e Fayyad per poter ricostruire un governo di unità nazionale che riscuota l’approvazione di ogni fazione palestinese e che avrebbe il compito di rappresentare il popolo palestinese
4 – la ristrutturazione dell’Organizzazione per la Liberazione della Palestinna che includa tutte le fazioni palestinesi e che ritorni al suo scopo originario: la liberazione della Palestina
5 – l’annuncio del congelamento dei negoziati finchè non ci sarà totale compatabilità tra le vari fazioni su un programma politico
6 – la fine di ogni forma di coordinamento con il nemico sionista sulla questione della sicurezza
7 – l’organizzazione di elezioni presidenziali e parlamentari simultanee nei tempi scelti da tutte le fazioni

Gli eventi avranno inizio il martedì, 15/03/2011 alle 11:30 e andranno avanti finchè non saranno accolte tutte le nostre richieste. Ci raduneremo nei seguenti posti (salvo modifiche):
Gaza: Piazza del Milite Ignoto
Ramallah: Piazza Manara
Tulkarm: Piazzale Gamal Abdel Nasser
Jenin: complesso dei garagi vicino al vecchio Cinema Jenin
Hebron: davanti all’ufficio del Governatore (Al Khalil)
Bethlehem: Piazza della Natività
Nablus: Piazza dei Martiri
Giordania e Libano: da definire
Nel mondo: davanti alle sedi diplomatici palestinesi, in coordinamento con le comunità palestinesi in esilio.

http://www.facebook.com/Palestinians.United?sk=info

Gaza Youth Breaks Out

Translated into Greek by Christina Baseos, translated into Italian by Mary Rizzo

Ghedaffi and Italian Foreign Minister Frattini

Eni and Impregilo, Unicredit, Astaldi, Finmeccanica, Fiat, and even Juventus: Italian business deals with GHEDDAFI

I reject this devious Italy, petty trafficker, always nostalgic for its own colonial failure, heavily involved in this massacre of civilians underway, accomplice of the ferocious oppression of a legitimate popular revolt. I reject this accomplice, Italy, debased, asleep

Francesca Antinucci

This reading can be enhanced by this musical accompaniment

(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWZR-ZO_m6A

for which I thank the wisdom of Doriana Goracci

Italian Prime Minister Berlusconi who kisses Ghedaffi's hand. Classic gesture used in the mafia to denote submission

Summary by Reuters

ENI: The major Italian oil company which has various activities in Libya, among which, long-term (take or pay) contracts. (Clause that is included in purchase contracts, under the basis that the purchased is obligated in all cases to pay, entirely or partially, the price of a minimum quantity of raw materials indicated within the contract, even in the possibility that this material is not withdrawn). The six-legged dog illustrates an investment plan running up to 25 billion dollars in the country. Tripoli had also indicated its intention of purchasing shares in the company.

  

IMPREGILO, ASTALDI: Impregilo,the leading construction company in Italy, would greatly benefit from the friendly relationship between Berlusconi and Gheddafi, in that they have been pre-qualified for the realisation of a super-highway project in Libya financed by the Italian government of a 5 billion Euros value. The second largest construction company in Italy, Astaldi, has also expressed interest in participating in the project. Impregilo has also been cited as a possible investment target by Libya.  

  

FINMECCANICA:  The Italian aerospace company in 2009 signed an agreement with Libya for the cooperation in the aerospace sector and in other projects in the Middle East and Africa. The agreement entails the creation of a 50-50 joint venture in which the partners are Finmeccanica and Libya Africa Investment Portfolio. Finmeccanica has also had various contracts with Libya, one of several, last year, for the construction of railways having a value of 247 million Euros. Not to be ignored is the fact that the Libyan Investment Autority holds 2.01% of the shares in Finmeccanica.

UNICREDIT. The Libyan holdings in the banking group are 7.5%, after the acquisition by the Libyan Investment Authority (LIA) of 2.59% of the capital. The Central Bank of Libya is another shareholder in Unicredit, with shares for 4.988% of the capital.  

FIAT. Libya came to the rescue of Fiat in 1977, upon the invitation of Giovanni Agnelli, with the acquisition of approximately 15% of the shares by the Lybian Arab Foreign Investment Company (Lafico). The investment gave rise to a strong wave of criticism. Fafico thus sold its shares in 1986, but in 2002 repurchased shares exceeding 2%. At the moment its shares amount to less than 2%. 

Libya, lastly, is active in football as well. Lafico in fact holds no less than 7.5% of the capital of Juventus. Al-Saadi Gheddafi, the Colonel’s son, once a player in the Perugia and Udinese teams, is also a member of the Board of Directors of Juventus. Libya at a certain point also thought of investing in Lazio and had invested in Triestina.

Lafico is also active in the textiles sector, holding shares worth 21.7% in Olcese, according to what is written in the company’s Internet site.  

Further reading:

http://domani.arcoiris.tv/mentre-il-medio-oriente-brucia-gheddafi-compra-100-milioni-di-azioni-finmeccanica-diventa-un-po%E2%80%99-padrone-di-armi-navi-e-aerei-non-si-sa-mai/

Translated by Mary Rizzo for We Write What We Like and Gulagnik