That reminds me, do you still want knitted toys for children in Gaza? I will be busy with knitting for Christmas, but after Christmas I usually have a lull that I dedicate to charity knitting.
Let me know and I start looking out for patterns.
No I am not in ship. It should be in Gaza tomorrow/Saturday (with 11 Swedish and 2 Finnish). Please make dua it really can enter to Gaza, not hijack by zionists and totally not same like what happened to Mavi Marmara...
Estelle and the freedom of association
by Gabriel Ash
October 17, 2012
Henry Norr calls the decision of the Estelle, the boat that is now making its way to Gaza to challenge the Israeli siege, to disinvite Ann Wright, "sheer madness," and "guilt by association." This Language is both wrong and false. I am not on or associated with the Estelle, and regardless of what I see as right, I support the autonomy of the people on the Estelle, given the nature of what they are doing, to refuse individual sail companions without having to justify it. Within reason and respect, we can speculate on or criticize their decisions and I will, but Norr's article goes well outside of both reason and respect. To begin, however, some analysis of the fault lines on which people fall on this matter bears examinations.
First, there are antisemites, a tiny minority. Second, there are those like Greta Berlin (and Henry Norr [1] and others), who consider antisemites who support Palestinian liberation to be valuable voices, demand their inclusion, defend their legitimacy, and challenge refusal to tolerate them misguidedly as "silencing." This tolerant attitude towards bigotry is the most likely cause for Berlin's mistaken tweet. Third, there are the majority of Palestine solidarity activists, who don't care for the support of bigots, and consider their inclusion and especially, giving them any prominence, the kiss of death. The board of Free Gaza, to which Ann Wright belongs, appears to have firmly planted its feet in the second camp by the tenor of their response, which dismissed the controversy as a non-issue and rejected criticism, crucially criticism by some of the most respected and longstanding Palestinian activists, as illegitimate.
There are many reasons why a person would defend bigots. Of course, the most ****ing reason comes immediately to mind: he or she could indeed approve of their bigotry. This possibility cannot be dismissed, and inevitably it casts a shadow over people. But there are other less ****ing reasons as well. He or she could be genuinely unable to recognize the bigotry. Because bigotry does a great part of its harm by being normalized, not being able to see it is a form of de facto support and complicity, even when it is not purposeful. Thus, it is not an excuse, and people who cannot see bigotry must be challenged to learn to see it.
Finally, she or he may clearly see the problem, yet believe that this particular bigotry should be ignored in a particular case for reasons of a political urgency and expediency. "Utilitarian" debates of the last type are quite common. It must be noted that there are many cases where almost every leftist would consider that is it legitimate to work with people who hold political views that one abhors. To take the most extreme but well known example, the radical left-wing militias fought together with the extreme right-wing ones in the Warsaw Ghetto uprising. To take a more pedestrian example, imagine a group of workers striking for pay while expressing bigoted positions on other questions, such as immigration: most leftists would support the strike. A closer example was the support many on the Egyptian left gave to the Muslim Brotherhood in the recent elections in Egypt. Thus, this last reason is indeed one that cannot be dismissed in principle and require serious attention, by evaluating context, situation and form. A key difference is between ad-hoc interactions, and sharing a single organization in which bigotry is normalized. The second is in principle never acceptable to leftists.
However, a prerequisite of debating how to respond to bigotry is the ability to see the difficulty and the costs, and to debate them rationally based on shared political assumptions. Those who cannot recognize antisemitism (or use a minimizing definition of it that is rejected by the vast majority of people on the left), and read rejection of bigotry, falsely, as an unacceptable challenge to "freedom of speech," rather than a matter of a fundamental political difference, do not fit the last category. That means that they fit in one of the other two. And that is the problem.
With regards to the Estelle, the matter is complicated by the circumstances. On the one hand, Wright was denied participation. There is no reason to deny someone participation in an action for the offense of not being clear or holding a minority opinion, beyond the minimal requirements that the group defines as its points of unity. It would be a mistake to start making stringent conditions on participating in political actions.
On the other hand, the Estelle is a small boat going into a potentially life-threatening situation. In this situation, trust is paramount, and those on the boat have a legitimate reason to carefully selecting whom they allow on board. Wright, as member of the FGM board, is responsible for the board's handling of the scandal, which included responding to respectful criticism by close colleagues with challenging the legitimacy of raising concerns. According to the statement of the former board members:
Consultations and efforts made by some of the former members of the board with the current board members were either rejected or set aside, which has added to our disappointment.[2]
To this, the board responded by characterizing all those who took issue with them, including the approach of the former board members, longstanding and respected Palestinian and solidarity activists, "vicious attacks."[3] In doing so, the board effectively described fellow activists and the Israeli media are one and the same and asked the broad movement to treat them in the same way. This is the Ann Coulter strategy and the word for this is bullying, which is compound in this case in that the context is the Palestinian liberation struggle and some of those bullied are Palestinians engaged in that struggle for decades. On this background, the decision of the Estelle is understandable. People who respond to criticism by bullying the critics are dangerous to their friends, and could be deadly in the kind of situations that the Estelle might meet.
Furthermore, the mission of the Estelle is to bring attention to the plight of Gaza under Israel's siege. Since much of the impact depends on coverage, one assumes the tenor of the media coverage that the boat gets is of paramount strategic importance to participants. Having on board a person who would lead media attention on a tangent would be detrimental to the mission even if that person were impeccable. This is not, after all, about Wright, and she has no right to expect that the people on the Estelle jeopardize their mission in order to "prove" that they don't consider Wright an antisemite. Wright says that she was disinvited "due to allegations of anti-Semitism of the Swedish Boat to Gaza by pro-Israelis groups in Sweden." Crucially, the Estelle did not publish their decision. Instead of recognizing the fact that her presence at this time would not be in the best interest of the mission, Wright effectively launched a public attack on the Estelle, paraphrasing what she was told in a way that suggest the organizers are subservient to Zionists. Again, this is the Ann Coulter strategy, and it should be condemned. Most likely, the boat organizers don't want to spend their limited resources defending someone who made herself a liability by her own disregard of fellow activists. They are right to privilege their mission, and Wright's subsequent behavior only justifies them further.
Norr's intervention is another example of bullying, and one that is furthermore built on abusing language. "Guilt by association" is a logical fallacy that consists on drawing a conclusion about one person based on an a non-essential similarity or relation with another. For example: Stalin is a communist and a mass murderer. Therefore other communists are guilty of (or support) mass murder. Or: The Occupy Movement was praised by a Neo-Nazi, therefore the Occupy Movement has a Neo-Nazi problem. These are fallacies. On the other hand, when people willfully associate with each other, in speech, writing, or through formal association, their association is indeed reflective of their politics. This is not "guilt by association." It is common sense. If a party in the US issues a statement defending or denying Stalin's crimes, the leadership is not victim of "guilt by association". It is simply wretched. If a person repeats defining elements of Nazi arguments or rhetoric, it is not "guilt by association" to point this out. It's a true indication of where they are on the political map. There is a rule of thumb most people master by the age of 16. You shouldn't associate with people you don't want to be associated with.
So far, nobody has accused Ann Wright of anything (except me, here, of trying to bully others to shut up). She is certainly not "guilty by association." It is Norr who is guilty of loose, uncalled for language. Berlin (and others) are also not victims of "guilt by association." They are however responsible for who they associate with, especially when those association lead to damage to others, and should not be surprised if those associations cast shadows over their credibility. They are also guilty of not understanding, or pretending not to understand, that political work is carried out in associative form, and therefore the freedom of association is its primary freedom, of which the freedom not to associate is an essential part. They seek to deny the rest of the movement the freedom of association by bullying others, with their language of "witch hunt", "guilt by association", and "sheer madness," into association with bigotry that they reject.
An Israeli Ex-IAF Pilot on Board of Swedish Boat To Gaza
DetailsPublished on Friday, 19 October 2012 08:53
Friday 19th October, Spokesperson of Gush Shalom, Adam Keller, said in a press release that Israeli peace activist Yonatan Shapira, who had been a combat pilot in the Israeli Air Force and refused to take part in the bombing of Palestinian cities, has arrived on board the Swedish boat "Estelle" which is making her way towards the coast of Gaza. When the Estelle passed near the shores of Greece, Shapira and other activists made their way in a motor boat, evading vessels of the Greek Coast Guard which sought to bar their way. "Along with the Greek Coast Guard we saw a ship which seemed very much like an Israeli Navy vessel, though it did not fly a flag" said Shapira. He was received with cheers by activists already on board. Shapira had taken part in a similar sailing last year, being taken off by Israeli Navy Commandos near the Gaza shore and spending time in police detention, but not charged with any criminal offence.
Meanwhile, Israel's Ambassador to the UN Ron Prosor has sent a letter calling on the United Nations to stop the Estelle from reaching her destination. To this activists on board respond: "If this means that Israel has decided to cede control over Palestinian territorial waters to the UN, this would actually be a step forward.
The UN and many other representatives of the International Community have for years characterized the siege of the Gaza strip as inhuman and incompatible with International Law.
Ship to Gaza Sweden assumes that that UN will not take over the implementation of this policy, by itself preventing a peaceful vessel from delivering humanitarian supplies.
Ship to Gaza and the Freedom Flotilla have never opposed lawful inspections of cargo and vessel by representatives of the UN, as well as by national authorities in the ports and waters we have passed through. We welcome further inspections of this kind by the UN, once we have anchored at Gaza City. What we refuse to accept is something which also the UN and the majority of The International Community oppose: The illegal siege of the Gaza Strip, with its devastating humanitarian results.
The Estelle has now set course to Gaza and, weather permitting, is due to get there on Saturday.
Adam Keller, Spokesperson of Gush Shalom, who is in ongoing contact with the Estelle activists, says that Israel's Prime Minister and Defense Minister still have some forty-eight hours' grace to make a wise and courageous decision, avoid another show of Israeli brute force in international waters and let the Estelle dock at the Port of Gaza – while implementing a thorough UN inspection of her cargo, to which the activists specifically consent.
Israel Calls UN to Prevent Estelle from Reaching the Gaza Strip
Palestine News Network
October 18, 2012
On Wednesday 17th October, Israel's Ambassador to the United Nations, Ron Prosor, called UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to prevent the Swedish Ship Estelle from reaching the Gaza Strip.
Prosor said, according to an Israeli broadcast, that the sailing ship to Gaza is a "provocative step" and that Israel insists on continuing the blockade on Gaza.
It's worth mentioning that the Estelle, has set sail from Naples, Italy on Saturday 6th September, and will sail to Gaza to challenge the Israeli blockade. The vessel is carrying only humanitarian goods.
There are 17 activists on board the ship, including people from Canada, Sweden, Norway, Israel, and the United States. They came to support Palestinians and to break the Israeli blockade.
All of the activists aboard the Estelle were required to sign a non violence declaration. Yet, one of the activists said, "We do not hit, or yell. If IOF soldiers board the ship and try to prevent it from reaching Gaza, we will try to protect our vessel with our bodies."
As Ship Approaches Gaza Shore, Israel To Attack Estelle Ship
Saturday October 20, 2012 00:39 by Saed Bannoura - IMEMC News
The Canadian Boat To Gaza reported that they received a message from the Finnish Foreign Department informing that Israel informed them that its soldiers will board Estelle solidarity ship currently around 120 Nautical Miles away from the Gaza shore.
Recent Picture Of Estelle Solidarity Activists - Twitter #Estelle
The Estelle ship is sailing under a Finnish flag; its crew was informed that the army will board the ship in international waters, and will tow the ship along with the activists to the Ashdod Port.
Activists on-board the ship said that if the Israeli army attacks them, the attack will be another act of piracy and kidnapping to enforce the illegal Israeli siege and blockade on the coastal region.
Irene McInnis of the Canadian Boat to Gaza stated that the ship is challenging the illegal and inhuman siege imposed on the coastal region, and added that “the world should not be silent anymore”.
It is worth mentioning that retired Canadian Member of Parliament (MP) is on board the Estelle solidarity ship.
A recent tweet from the ship says; "The crew reports that it is dark and still calm, but there are unidentified boats moving around them. We wish for peace and justice", the Ship to Gaza Sweden Ship to Gaza Sweden @ShiptoGazaSE said on its twitter account.
Last Sunday, Israel issued a warning informing Finland that its army will intercept and stop the Estelle solidarity ship heading to the Gaza Strip to deliver humanitarian supplies.
20 - 30 military ships and even one helicopter around sailing ship where is books for kids, footballs and even 5 members of parlaments from many countries.
Humanitarian work seems to be real danger to someones.
From Occupied Palestine:
We have suffered too much for too long. We will not accept apartheid masked as peace. We will settle for no less than our freedom.
Israeli navy hijacks aid ship "Estelle" in Gaza waters
[ 20/10/2012 - 11:18 AM ]
OCCUPIED JERUSALEM, (PIC)-- Israeli navy soldiers boarded the Gaza-bound relief ship "Estelle," which was seeking to deliver humanitarian aid to Gaza and challenge the blockade imposed on its people, Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper said on Saturday morning.
The newspaper said the soldiers seized control of the ship, which is carrying pro-Palestinian activists.
"When the passengers made it clear that they would not cooperate or accept the invitation to sail to Ashdod port, it was decided to seize the vessel and bring it to the port," an Israeli military source told the newspaper.
Earlier on the same day, the Norwegian newspaper Verdens Gang said the Israeli navy intends to attack the humanitarian aid ship Estelle off the coast of Gaza.
The newspaper affirmed that if the aid ship did not change its course and kept sailing into Gaza waters, the Israeli navy would certainly intercept it sometime on Saturday or Sunday.
The CNN also quoted passengers onboard as saying that the aid ship was flanked by Israeli gunboats this morning.
The ship is carrying humanitarian aid including two olive trees, 41 tons of cement, books, toys and medical equipment, the CNN reported.
It noted that "those onboard the ship are hoping to call attention to the blockade of the Palestinian territory, which has been under an Israeli blockade since 2007."
"I want to say that we are here to give a message of solidarity to the people of Gaza," one of the passengers said.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
sister herb liked this post
format_quote Originally Posted by glo
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks