Lawsuit threatened against Coca Cola for call to boycott Israel
I am old enough to remember when certain countries - including Israel - either had Coke or Pepsi available, but not both. That was because if you sold in Israel, you couldn't sell in Russia or the Arab world. One of the first transactions I worked on when I made aliya (immigrated to Israel) was a financing for the company that bought the rights to be the first to market Pepsi in this country.
Now, at least one Coca Cola franchisee would like to go back to those days, and Coca Cola has decided to give his views a platform. The franchisee is a 'Palestinian American' named Zahi Khouri, and he's the exclusive franchisee for Coca Cola in the 'West Bank' and Gaza. Khouri seems to think he can
garner more business by issuing calls to boycott Israel (NOTE to those who still don't get that the goal of BDS is to destroy Israel: He wants to boycott ALL OF ISRAEL). And Coca Cola is giving him a platform to do so. Ronn Torossian reports.
On Coca-Cola’s website, one can read of an award that was recently presented to Zahi Khouri, CEO of Coca-Cola Palestine,
founder of the Palestinian National Beverage Company and exclusive
holder of the Coca-Cola franchise in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The
beverage conglomerate’s blog “invites Khouri to share his optimism, grit
and reflection” with their global readers.
One wonders if his reflections represent Coca-Cola as a whole; for
the Palestinian-American entrepreneur supports a boycott of Israel and
urges sanctions against the Jewish State.
...
In November 2014, The Jerusalem Post reported
that “Coca-Cola plans to build its first factory in Gaza,” noting the
company had invested $25 Million into its Palestinian area business in
the past five years, with Mr. Khouri as a partner. At the time, Mr.
Khouri said all the right things, including this memorable soundbite: “The
only enemy of extremism is good jobs.” A deeper look at Mr. Khouri’s
rhetoric, however, reveals an executive more in line with Gaza
hardliners than has been portrayed in the press.
Perhaps at the time Coca-Cola was unaware of Mr. Khouri’s September 2014 op-ed in the Orlando Sentinel in which their partner & regional CEO noted
that the “non-violent efforts of Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions
(BDS) advocates make sense as a means to force Israel to recognize that
the occupation is not cost-free.” Coca-Cola’s local partner suggested
that “countries, like those in the European Union, could enforce their
own laws against doing businesses with countries that violate human
rights.”
Perhaps Mr. Khouri should re-read the Coca-Cola Code of Business Conduct for franchisees,
which states, “because The Coca-Cola Company is incorporated in the
United States, our employees around the world often are subject to U.S.
laws.” In addition to it being morally wrong to boycott Israel, recent
amendments by the U.S. House and Senate require
U.S. trade negotiators to “discourage politically motivated actions” by
foreign countries and international organizations that aim to “penalize
or otherwise limit” commercial relations with Israel or “persons doing
business in Israel or in territories controlled by Israel.” A regional
CEO threatening to boycott America’s staunchest Mid-East ally is cause
for concern on many levels for Coca-Cola.
Yet, Mr. Khouri flouts these regulations, noting in the Washington insider publication The Hill
that “this Congress is now legislating against the Palestinian
nonviolent action of Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) as a means
to secure Palestinian freedom.” He then urges Jewish Voices for Peace,
the anti-Zionist organization funded by George Soros, to assist him in
lobbying efforts in Washington, DC. Does he also meet with Coca-Cola
lobbyists while in our nation’s capitol?
When advocating in favor of BDS, Mr. Khouri is careful to identify
himself not with Coca-Cola but as, for example, a “Palestinian-American
businessman,” as he did in his bio line on The Hill or as
“chairman of Orlando-based Intram Investments and chairman of the
Palestinian Tourism Co. in Ramallah,” as reads his bio in the Sentinel. (Multiple
emails and calls to Coca-Cola, Mr. Khouri, and Palestinian National
Beverage Company requesting comment for this story were not returned. If
any responds, this story will be updated to include their viewpoint.)
One group has responded. No, it's not Coca Cola. It's Nitzana Darshan-Leitner's Israel Law Center, which is threatening to
sue Coca Cola if it doesn't sever ties with Khouri.
“This letter is a warning to the Coca-Cola Company that it should
rescind its franchise agreement with the Palestinian National Beverage
Company, headed by Zahi Khouri, who openly advocates for BDS against
Israel,” said a letter from the Israel Law Center to Mr. Mukhtar Kent,
CEO of Coca Cola.
...
In its letter Monday, the Israel Law Center’s Nitsana Darshan-Leitner
and US attorney Robert Tolchin argued that calls for a boycott violate
the Anti-Racism Convention, as well as various state and federal laws.
It also represents a breach of Coca-Cola Company’s own Code of Business
Conduct, it claimed. The company’s ethics code, which the law center
said binds its foreign subsidiaries as well, states, “The Company also
must abide by US anti-boycott laws that prohibit companies from
participating in any international boycott not sanctioned by the US
government.”
The BDS movement “is inherently racist, anti-Semitic, biased and
prejudicial and has an extremist agenda that unfairly singles out Israel
and Jews. The BDS movement’s goal is solely the destruction of the
State of Israel and its Jewish community. It masquerades as a human
rights movement, but it is singularly fixated on Israel and Jews and
ignores egregious human rights abuses that do not feed its anti-Israel
agenda,” the Israeli NGO representatives wrote.
No response yet from Coca Cola.
Labels: BDS, Coca Cola, Shurat HaDin
Indicted for war crimes!
Hamas politburo chief Khaled Meshaal is accused of war crimes in a criminal indictment filed by the Israeli organization Shurat HaDin with the International Criminal Court. No, he hasn't been indicted for shooting rockets at Jews or attempting to kidnap and murder Jews using underground terror tunnels. Rather, he's been accused of
murdering 'Palestinian' 'collaborators' with Israel without trials.
Shurat Hadin, which prosecutes international terrorist groups and
their supporters, said the indictment was in response to the summary
execution of 38 Palestinians in Gaza during the final days of Operation
Protective Edge. Such executions without any legal due process is a
clear violations of international humanitarian law, the NGO pointed out.
The men were shot dead - some of them publicly - after being accused of cooperating with Israel, following the assassination of three senior Hamas military leaders and the attempted assassination of the terrorist group's military chief Mohammed Deif.
But rights groups say the charges of "collaboration" with Israel were
simply used as an excuse for Hamas to kill off several high-profile
political opponents, including members of Palestinian Authority Chairman
Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah party.
The indictment noted that Mashaal run's Hamas's "murderous rule" of
Gaza, and thereby is responsible for the executions. Indeed, Mashaal is
Hamas's most senior political figure, and as chief of the group's
"political beurou" has direct control over affairs in the Gaza Strip.
Shurat Hadin founder and chairwoman attorney Nitzana Darshan-Leitner
noted that Mashaal is a Jordanian citizen, and can therefore be
prosecuted by the ICC because Jordan is a party to the Rome Statute.
Despite that, Jordan has never requested Mashaal's extradition from his
base in Qatar, nor has it sought to fulfill its legal obligations to
prosecute other Hamas leaders with Jordanian citizenship over war crimes
or terrorism charges.
Hamas proudly took responsibility for the executions, and celebrated them as a "victory for the resistance". Footage aired by CNN shows Hamas executioners publicly reading out the verdict against some of the condemned men in a Gaza mosque.
I doubt that Meshaal will ever face any kind of punishment, but a ruling against him could mean that he cannot travel anywhere outside the Arab-Muslim world (which we already know
ignores the court's rulings when they're against its own) without fear of arrest. I can't see the likes of Britain, France of Germany, let alone the US, allowing him entry into their countries if he's a fugitive from justice for war crimes.
What could go wrong?
Labels: collaborators, Gaza, Hamas, International Criminal Court, Khaled Meshaal, Shurat HaDin, war crimes
NGO report ties Oxfam to designated terror organization
A newly-released report by Shurat HaDin, an Israeli non-governmental organization (NGO), accuses Oxfam, a British NGO that is supported by a number of sovereign governments around the world, of having ties with the
Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, which has been designated a terror organization in the United States, Britain and the European Union. Oxfam loudly
fired actress Scarlett Johansson as their spokesperson in January after Johansson took a position as spokesperson for SodaStream, an Israeli company that maintains a factory in Maaleh Adumim, which is in Judea.
For both political and propaganda reasons,
many terrorist organizations like Hezbollah and Hamas have
operated social service branches since their inception. The
PFLP has done the same for decades.
Oxfam has strong connections to two of these organizations:
The Union of Health Workers Committees (UHWC), which
provides medical services; and the Union of Agricultural
Workers Committees (UAWC), which deals with land ownership and agricultural issues. The UHWC and the UAWC deny
any connections to the PFLP. In the past, however, both have
acknowledged that they were founded as part of the PFLP and
share personnel with the terrorist group. There is, we believe,
conclusive evidence that they remain branches of their parent
organization, despite attempts to conceal these ties.
Oxfam’s connections to UHWC and UAWC have been publicly
acknowledged by the NGO. Oxfam has described both groups
as “partners” in its activities in both Gaza and the West Bank,
and proudly stated that Oxfam works “very closely” with them.
This closeness was recently reaffirmed by the signing of a new
agreement under which Oxfam pledged to continue funding
the UHWC. Oxfam has also issued many press releases and
calls for action that endorse both groups and even solicit
publicity for them.
A press release issued in 2008, for example, cited “Al-Awda
hospital in Jabaliya, run by
Oxfam’s partner,
the Union of
Health
Work Committees” (emphasis ours). More recently, a 2012
“media
advisory” regarding health issues in Gaza stated, “Oxfam’s
partner
UAWC is working to get emergency assistance to
those most at
risk. UAWC is available for interviews in English” (emphasis ours).
...
The group acknowledges 17 individual branches, coordinated
by the organization’s International Secretariat. Its branches
“are based in: Australia, Belgium, Canada, France, Germany,
Great Britain, Hong Kong, Ireland, India, Italy, Japan, Mexico, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Quebec, Spain and the United
States” as well as “advocacy offices” in “Brussels, Geneva, New
York, Washington DC and Brasilia.”
Since 1942, Oxfam has risen from a small, single-issue
organization to one of the largest, wealthiest, and most
influential NGOs in the world. According to its
2013 annual
report
, Oxfam enjoyed revenues last year of almost a
billion
Euros, the lion’s share of which comes from “institutional
fundraising,” the UN, the EU, and other governments. Although
it bills itself as a charity and often requests personal donations
,
only 40 percent of its revenue comes from “public fundraising.”
...
The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine is a Palestinian nationalist organization based on communist ideology.
It has engaged in terrorism since its inception. Formed in 1967
following the Six Day War, it quickly became one of the largest
parties in the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), and
has attracted both violently militant terrorists and a strong
intellectual following among both Arabs and the European
extreme Left. Throughout its history, it has consistently
rejected Israel’s right to exist and advocated its replacement
with an Arab state. Although it has sporadically supported negotiations with Israel, it
currently opposes talks or a peace agreement between Israelis and Palestinians.
Read the whole thing.
I'm shocked.... Just totally shocked.... (NOT).
By the way, I had forgotten, but Scarlett Johansson was not the first spokesperson fired by Oxfam for ties to a company in Israel. That honor goes to
Sex in the City's
Kirstin Davis.
And the picture at the top of this post? It's an Oxfam billboard from the baggage claim area at Reagan National Airport in Washington DC. Haven't been there recently, but a friend snapped the picture last week.
Labels: Ahava cosmetics, designated terror organization, Oxfam, PFLP-GC, Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Scarlet Johansson, Shurat HaDin, SodaStream
Oxfam accused of supporting 'Palestinian' terror organization
Israeli NGO Shurat HaDin has accused Oxfam of
donating money to organizations that support the Popular Front for the Liberation of 'Palestine,' a terrorist organization.
The letter alleges that Oxfam “provides financial aid and additional
forms of material support to the Union of Health Workers Committees
(UHWC) and the Union of Agricultural Workers Committees (UAWC),
instrumentalities of the terrorist Popular Front for the Liberation of
Palestine (PFLP) in the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip and the Palestinian
Authority.”
The PFLP has been associated with major terrorist
attacks dating back to the 1972 Lod Airport massacre, the assassination
of then-tourism minister Rehavam Ze’evi in 2001, and – according to a
report obtained by The Jerusalem Post from an expert on terrorism –
rocket attacks during former prime minister Ariel Sharon’s funeral and
other recent attacks.
The letter notes that “Oxfam readily
acknowledges it works very closely with these two Palestinian groups” –
which it says were created and are subsidized by the PFLP – and
“provides them financial support.”
“Your organization has
described them as your ‘partners’ in the numerous press communications
and reports you have published. Indeed, last month you signed a new
agreement with the UHWC to provide it further financial support,” said
Shurat Hadin.
Oxfam’s office in England said it had not yet
received the letter, but referred the Post to a statement by
Australia’s Foreign Ministry in May 2012 which rejected what appeared
to be similar allegations by Shurat Hadin regarding the UAWC. The
statement said that the UAWC was registered in Israel and not declared
illegal in Israel.
The Australian statement also said that no
offense was identified and named several European countries and Japan as
supporting the UAWC.
...
The letter notes that the EU has designated the PFLP as a terrorist
organization and that, “Article 3 of the EU Common Position prohibits
the making available of, directly or indirectly, funds, financial
assets or economic resources or other related services to or for the
benefit of the listed terrorist entities.”
Turning to US law, the
letter says that the PFLP is officially designated a “Foreign Terrorist
Organization,” pursuant to section 219 of the US Immigration and
Nationality Act and other legal provisions.
According to Shurat
Hadin, under a 2010 US Supreme Court case, Holder v. Humanitarian Law
Project, “any assistance or support to designated terrorist groups,
include putatively benign forms of assistance (such as agricultural
aid) is criminal.”
Read the whole thing.
Labels: European Union, Oxfam, Palestinian terrorism, Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Shurat HaDin, United States
A great idea - too bad they won't do it
Shurat HaDin has suggested to the Corrie family that they
sue the 'Palestinian Authority' and the International Solidarity Movement for their daughter's death. Too bad they're most unlikely to take the advice.
“Rachel Corrie’s parents should sue the Palestinian Authority (PA) and the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) for being responsible for their daughter’s death” – this according to Nitsana Darshan-Leitner, director of Shurat HaDin – Israel Law Center. The Tel Aviv-based counter-terror organization further noted on Wednesday that both the PA and ISM were the ones that provided support to Rachel Corrie while she was obstructing an IDF military operation aimed at uncovering terrorist-planted explosive devices.
Yesterday, the Haifa District Court ruled the 2003 incident a “regrettable accident,” rejecting completely claims made by the Corrie family’s that the IDF bulldozer intentionally ran over the ISM activist. In his verdict, the judge underlined that Rachel Corrie knowingly placed herself in a dangerous war zone, particularly an area which just hours before was the site of an attack against IDF forces. The judge moreover held that the bulldozer’s driver, as well as its commander, had not and could not have noticed Corrie due to an obstructed view. The ruling made point that the ISM had been found to be indirectly aiding terrorists in some cases.
“We applaud the district court’s decision. It has been undoubtedly evidenced that both the PA and ISM continue to associate with the scourge of terrorism directed against the Israeli democracy, even making use of foreign citizens to serve as human shields for militant activity. The Corrie family should point their fingers at the real culprits,” stressed Darshan-Leitner.
Don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen. This isn't about justice for Rachel Corrie; it's about bashing Israel.
Labels: Rachel Corrie, Shurat HaDin
Soccer Dad's Middle East Media Sampler
Here's Soccer Dad's Middle East Media Sampler for Thursday, July 26.
1) The failure of the world's human rights bureaucracy
Kenneth Anderson asks Why does the UN still exist?(h/t Instapundit)
It does not finally matter what the scandal, the appallingly bad behavior, the failure of management or of execution or of fiscal control happens to be. It can be wholesale mismanagement and corruption through the Oil-for-Food program (does anyone still recall that multi-billion dollar scandal?) and the flight of a senior UN executive to his extradition-free home state.
It might be rape and sexual predation against the young, not only by UN peacekeeping troops trading sex for food but also by UN civilian staff in African conflicts—followed by stern pronouncements of zero tolerance but no actual criminal prosecutions. Or it might be the unveiling of a $23 million mural on the ceiling of the UN Human Rights Council chambers—the main sponsor, Spain, having raided its international development aid budget to help pay for it. It might be the relentless orchestration of reports, statements, declarations, resolutions, and investigations by that same Human Rights Council, beneath its magnificent mural, and its members and various “independent” experts and NGO enablers against a single state: Israel.
Or it could be the utter and disastrous inability of the United Nations to actually get aid in a timely fashion to victims of the 2004 tsunami, as its aid czar held press conferences and sent observers to reconnoiter and finally fell into the usual default activity of blaming the United States. Or—at the largest political levels, looking back across UN history—it might be UN inaction in genocide in Rwanda and Bosnia.
These are points to remember every time the media cites the UN or any of its bodies as an authority on anything. The UN is hopelessly corrupt and ineffective.
So too are many NGOs. But Roger Simon notes one NGO that is doing something useful.
Remember those sanctions the administration is always telling us will bring Iran to its knees and force the mullahs to abandon their nuclear ambitions – yes, those same sanctions that always seem to have loopholes for the Russians, the Chinese, the Europeans, even for American and multi-national companies?
Well, Shurat HaDin – the Israel Law Center that has done yeoman work suing those who aid and abet terrorism – is now challenging one of those companies, global mobile satellite giant Inmarsat PLC, whose guidance systems service Iranian oil tankers and military vessels (!).
I wonder when the New York Times will report on Shurat Hadin instead of the next Amnesty International or B'tselem report condemning Israel for something. Needless to say media interest in international law is highly selective.
2) Unsustainable
The AP reports World Bank Says Palestinian Economy Unsustainable:
The study's author, John Nasir, said the Palestinian Authority has made steady progress toward establishing a future state, "but the economy is currently not strong enough to support such a state."
"Economic sustainability cannot be based on foreign aid, so it is critical for the Palestinian Authority (PA) to increase trade and spur private sector growth," he added.
The bank noted that Israeli restrictions remain the biggest impediment to investing, creating high uncertainty and risk.
Of course the World Bank would blame it on Israel. A more likely explanation is that the foreign aid to the Palestinians, who have been one of the highest per capita recipients of foreign aid in the world, has distorted their economy and discouraged private investment. (Not to mention that there's evidence that foreign aid has encouraged terrorism rather than coexistence.)
The article concludes:
The World Bank's assessment contradicts that of the International Monetary Fund, which last year said Palestinian financial institutions were ready for statehood.
That suggests that the IMF's conclusion was not based on evidence but on political considerations as Mahmoud Abbas sought statehood in the UN.
Also the New York Times reports Gaza: Fears of Economic Isolation:
The diplomat, Robert H. Serry, special coordinator for the Middle East peace process, told the Security Council that the Palestinian Authority “faces an acute challenge in maintaining its solvency” and noted its late payment of government salaries. Mr. Serry also said that during a visit this month to Gaza, which is run by the anti-Israeli militant group Hamas, he was “struck by the fragility and unsustainability of the present situation.”
Serry, of course, is silent on the continued attacks on southern Israel from Gaza ( according to the latest figures from the IDF, there have 431 rockets during 2012.) Somehow Hamas despite its "isolation" is able to maintain a steady flow of ordnance into Gaza.
3) A pro-Israel New York Times op-ed!
It's a rarity these days, but the New York Times published an op-ed, Israel's settlers are here to stay by Dany Dayan, that can fairly be called "pro-Israel."
While the status quo is not anyone’s ideal, it is immeasurably better than any other feasible alternative. And there is room for improvement. Checkpoints are a necessity only if terror exists; otherwise, there should be full freedom of movement. And the fact that the great-grandchildren of the original Palestinian refugees still live in squalid camps after 64 years is a disgrace that should be corrected by improving their living conditions.
Yossi Beilin, a left-wing former Israeli minister, wrote a telling article a few months ago. A veteran American diplomat touring the area had told Mr. Beilin he’d left frightened because he found everyone — Israel, the Palestinian Authority, Jordan and Saudi Arabia — content with the current situation. Mr. Beilin finds this widespread satisfaction disturbing, too.
I think it is wonderful news. If the international community relinquished its vain attempts to attain the unattainable two-state solution, and replaced them with intense efforts to improve and maintain the current reality on the ground, it would be even better. The settlements of Judea and Samaria are not the problem — they are part of the solution.
Of course, I wouldn't be surprised to see an editorial tomorrow citing this op-ed as a sign that settlements (Dayan boasts that soon 400,000 Jews will be living in Judea and Samaria) continue to be the single biggest obstacle to peace.
4) More on Romney's VFW speech
David French, an admitted Romney partisan writes in Mitt Romney Understands the Need for American Strength for the National Review:
This is exactly right. As we face an unthinking, draconian sequestration of our military budget, it’s worth asking: When has America ever suffered because of an excess in military strength? How many times have we suffered because of weakness?
Throughout our history we’ve paid a bloody price for military weakness. Military weakness has meant a White House burned, a secessionist movement that fed off early victories over ill-prepared troops, horrifying carnage in World War I as we spent the better part of a year ramping up our military to aid allies on the brink of defeat, months of Japanese victories following Pearl Harbor culminating in the Bataan Death March, and panicked retreats marking the beginning of the Korean War. How many times do we have to learn the same lessons?
In the present conflict, al-Qaeda exploited weakness in our will (it’s still astounding that we had to use Pakistani armor to help rescue American forces trapped in Mogadishu and that direct terrorist attacks resulted only in ineffectual volleys of cruise missiles) to build a terrorist sub-state in the middle of Afghanistan, and weakness in the face of 33 years of Iranian hostility has brought a terrorist state to the brink of nuclear capability.
Walter Russell Mead was more restrained in his analysis.
It was not a speech that will change the election or define an era. No gushing acolytes pretending to be journalists will compare the governor to Abraham Lincoln, FDR and Daniel Webster combined. No phrases like “iron curtain”, “ask not what you can do for your country,” or “tear down that wall” rang through it.
It was a little like Governor Romney himself: deeply earnest, Wonder Bread rather than pumpernickel or rye, flat when it tried to soar, seemingly plainspoken and yet somehow opaque, at its most cautious when sounding most bold. It was in places so bland and vague that one began to despair of it, yet behind the smoke and mirrors there is an impression of something solid, if hard to see. It seemed precisely calibrated and effectively delivered from a political point of view: aiming at opening a number of lines of attack on the Obama administration without offering many targets for return fire.
Mead concluded:
If the Romney campaign hoped to showcase some potentially effective attack points in the campaign against the incumbent, this was a successful speech. If it hoped to establish the governor as a world statesman with a coherent vision of where he wants to lead the nation, it was, at best, a first effort.
2012 is not a foreign policy election today, and barring dramatic developments overseas before Election Day, it won’t turn into one. But a successful presidential candidate needs to impress voters as someone to whom they can entrust their security in a dangerous world. Governor Romney will have to come back to the state of the world before November, and he will have to say more about it than he did in Reno.
Labels: Campaign 2012, Middle East Media Sampler, Mitt Romney, Palestinian Authority, revenants, Shurat HaDin, Soccer Dad, United Nations, World Bank
Stopping Iranian oil sales by taking away their transponders
Some of you may recall that Nitzana Darshan-Leitner's Shurat HaDin put a big crimp in the attempt to send a flotilla to Gaza last summer by suing
INMARSAT, the company that provides transponders to ships at sea and claiming that they were aiding and abetting terrorism.
Now, Shurat HaDin is going after INMARSAT again. This time, they're trying to stop them from
providing transponder services to tankers carrying Iranian oil.
Nitsana Darshan-Leitner, (real) human rights activist and Shurat HaDin’s founder, has submitted a letter to Inmarsat’s leadership citing a 2008 US Supreme Court ruling that those who support terror organizations are liable in US court for the murder an injuries they cause. Darshan-Leitner told the satellite company: “We will not tolerate Inmarsat’s – or any corporation’s – profiting from the blood of innocent people. Anything short of immediate and decisive action on our part would be akin to acceptance. It is a simple issue of justice: Inmarsat must uphold its legal obligations in compliance with US Treasury regulations and immediately cease its support for Iran.”
You can find the full letter to INMARSAT
here.
Labels: Inmarsat, Iran sanctions regime, Iranian oil, Shurat HaDin
How the flotilla was stopped
Alana Goodman tells us about the
lawyers who stopped the flotilla of fools.
The first step the legal center took against the flotilla was to target private companies that may have been assisting it. “We thought, what do boats need in order to sail?” Darshan-Leitner told me. “And we realized that all boats must have insurance.” Shurat HaDin began by contacting the major maritime insurance agencies, and informing them they might be criminally liable for “aiding and abetting” a terrorist organization if they provided insurance.
The response was very positive: some of the companies even said they were aware of the legal consequences, and had already made the decision not to work with the flotilla.
Shortly after, Shurat HaDin was contacted by the Israeli Prime Minister’s office, which offered its assistance. “They said we had to do anything, anything possible to stop the flotilla,” said Darshan-Leitner. “They asked if there was anything they could do. We said, ‘you tell us, what else do ships need?’”
The prime minister’s office said the boats would require satellite communication service to access GPS, contact the port, and – most importantly – to facilitate media coverage. Shurat HaDin immediately sent a letter to the major satellite provider for the area, warning it of the legal consequences if it worked with the flotilla.
Next, Shurat HaDin lawyers discovered American flotilla activists were potentially in violation of the Neutrality Act, which prohibits U.S. citizens from taking part in a hostile act against an allied country. “So we approached the Attorney General of the United States to fix it. And we also got Gov. Rick Perry to write a letter to Eric Holder,” said Darshan-Leitner.
It may seem a little weird that the governor of Texas would be one of the first people Darshan-Leitner approached to help with the plan. But she explained that Perry was enthusiastically on-board with the cause ever since he met her on a trip to Israel.
“I once spoke at a mission that Perry took part in, in Israel,” she said. “And he approached me and said, ‘I love what you do. It’s amazing what you do. If you ever need help combating Israel’s enemies, I’m here to assist.’”
So with Attorney General Holder on notice – and a Neutrality Act lawsuit filed in New York federal court – Shurat HaDin turned its attention toward Greece. The group discovered the country had a Neutrality Act similar to the one in the U.S., and it prohibited boats from leaving Greece to sail to illegal ports, including Gaza.
Shurat HaDin notified the Greek minister of civil protection about the flotilla, and he immediately blocked the ships from leaving Greece.
“The second thing he did was order the port authorities in Greece to raid the boats and to find what’s wrong with each and every boat – to be very, very particular,” said Darshan-Leitner, clearly amused. “And at that point, an additional six or seven boats were grounded. Because they found a lot of [problems] there.”
This was around the time Code Pink’s Medea Benjamin and her fellow flotilla activists finally caught on to the scheme. But by that point, there wasn’t much they could do.
Read the whole thing. It's amazing how smart we Jews can be when we want to be.
Labels: Avi Leitner, Code Pink, flotilla of fools, Medea Benjamin, Nitzana Darshan-Leitner, Shurat HaDin
Another brilliant attempt to stop the flotilla
An Israeli resident of Sderot has filed a lawsuit in Florida State Court to stop Inmarsat from providing satellite tracking services for the boats in the flotilla of fools. Inmarsat is a British company that provides such services worldwide. Every country in the World requires that boats flying under its flag have such services. The suit was filed through the Israeli human rights group
Shurat HaDin.
The suit was filed by Attorney Isaac Jaroslawicz. The plaintiff, Michelle Fendel, a resident of the southern Israeli town of Sderot, asserts in her complaint that under US law, Inmarsat and is officers have aided and abetted terrorism by providing satellite services to the Gaza-bound ships.
Prior to filing the lawsuit, the attorneys for Fendel sent Inmarsat a warning letter demanding that it discontinue all satellite services to the boats being utilized to engaged in hostile operations against Israel. The letter noted that by providing services during the upcoming flotilla, Inmarsat and its corporate officers were violation of US criminal statutes prohibiting the provision of material support for acts of violence and terrorism (18 U.S.C. § 2339A and § 2339B) and the provision of material support for naval expeditions against U.S. allies (18 U.S.C. § 960 and § 962), and would also be held civilly liable for any damages or harm caused by participants in the flotilla.
Heh.
Elder has the
complaint embedded on his site. Curiously, all they are seeking is a permanent injunction and a declaratory judgment. It's strange to me that they're not requesting a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction to prevent the satellite tracking services from being provided NOW. Hmmm.
Labels: flotilla of fools, Gaza plenty, Inmarsat, Shurat HaDin
