 |
| |
|
|
Firelad
|
|
Haifa, Israel.
May 2002
time: 07:36
|
|
I recieved this email today, I wonder what you all would say.
~Marc
>PLEASE DISTRIBUTE WIDELY
>
>Dear friends,
>
>It has been a while since we last sent out an update on imprisoned objectors
>in Israel, mostly because the Israeli military preferred to avoid
>imprisoning objectors in recent months. Today, however, we have a case to
>report.
>
>Yahel Avigur, a pacifist conscientious objector to military service from
>Qiriat Motzkin, near Haifa (see his photo in the attached file) has been
>sentenced on Sunday (27 February 2005) to 28 days in military prison. The
>charge against him was that he refused to wear military uniform. He was not
>imprisoned immediately. Rather, he was detained yesterday in the Beit-Lid
>military base, and is due to be transferred to Military Prison No. 4 in
>Tzrifin today (1 March). He is due to be released from prison on Friday, 25
>March 2005. It is very likely that he will be sent to prison again soon
>afterwards, probably several times. In fact, the officer who sentenced him,
>one Zeev Sharoni, took bother to tell Yahel so at the time of the 'trial'.
>
>This is the second prison term for Yahel. He has already spent 14 days in
>prison in late October and early November 2004, but at the time he asked us
>not to give publicity to his case (which is why it was not reported back
>then). Yahel has decided to refuse to perform military service already after
>he has been formally enlisted. After his first prison term, he was allowed
>to appear before the internal military Conscience Committee. The committee
>summoned to hear Yahel's appeal was not the Conscience Committee in its
>present make-up, which also includes one civilian member, but rather the
>Committee in its older make-up, with military career officers alone as
>members. This committee has turned down his request for exemption from
>military service on grounds of conscience, but no formal notification of
>that decision, nor any statement of the grounds for rejecting his appeal
>have been given to date. It should be mentioned that appeals by soldiers to
>this committee have practically always been rejected.
>
>In a statement he has made shortly before his second arrest, Yahel Avigur
>writes:
>
> ...The procedures that might have led to my discharge from the army have
>been exhausted. Although I have made my intentions clear and have proven
>their sincerity, my right to be discharged has not been recognised. All I
>can do now is to refuse to obey any order given me, and to spend some time
>in prison, until the military system realises it is unreasonable to continue
>my incarceration.
>
> I believe that in every person there is the potential to live a life of
>peace and love to others and to oneself; a potential to comprehend the basic
>identity between oneself and every human being - for we are all born,
>breathe and die. We are saddened by the same things: we all fear decay and
>death, failures, disappointments. Every person has the potential to
>understand that one is part of a huge interrelated system, all of the
>components of which are essentially the same, as they are manifestations of
>life. I see how we are drawn away from realising this comprehension by
>forming barriers and borders between ourselves and 'the other', by believing
>we are different than the others and even hostile to them. Thus we create
>ever more suffering - for ourselves as well as for the other.
>
> I see how humanity acts increasingly to entrench this perception. Wars and
>borders between States, inter-class alienation, viewing the environment as a
>mere resource, which I should exploit for my own personal benefit - these
>are some of the manifestations of this perception, and they to are gaining
>strength. Today there is no doubt that this way leads to the destruction of
>the human species and perhaps of the whole world. Weapons of mass
>destruction, in the hands of thousands of people willing to destroy
>everything in the name of this perception. A collapsing ecological system,
>which we all consume in the name of this perception, lead us towards certain
>death.
>
> Violence is fed by this perception, which presents me as different from
>the other. The willingness to harm a creature perfectly identical to oneself
>can only come out of a denial of this basic identity, and of a belief that
>an essential difference exists between the two. Thus, the use of violence
>blinds our eyes to seeing the other and feeds this false and destructive
>perception.
>
> Violence spreads ever further. A person who has been the victim of
>violence would internalise it and turn it towards the other. A person who
>has used violence internalises the alienation from others and the
>willingness to use violence against them. The use of violence would only
>bring further violence. A solution for violence can only come out of
>nonviolence. Only the complete abolishment of violence, and replacing it
>with a sense of equality, listening, empathy and love as the forces taking
>hold of the mind, may bring violence to a stop and allow us to live in
>peace, us and the others. Only an attempt to actually fulfil what clearly
>needs fulfilling, only liberation from the perception counter-posing one
>human being to another, may turn us around and lead us away from the brink
>of an abyss.
>
> In the name of these beliefs I have chosen not to fill the ranks of the
>army.
>
> I love many people. My family, my girlfriend, my friends ... my tutors.
>They all taught me to love everything, to love myself, to love every human
>being. This is all I want. This is my only statement. This is the only
>reason for doing what I do.
>
> I love you all very much.
>
> Yahel Avigur
> 20 Feb. 2005
>
>
>What can we do?
>First of all, please circulate this message and the information contained in
>it as widely as possible, not only through e-mail, but also on websites,
>conventional media, by word of mouth, etc. Other recommendations for action:
>
>1. Sending Letters of Support
>Please send the Yahel your messages of support to:
>
>Yahel Avigur (Military ID 7379352)
>Military Prison No. 4,
>Military postal number 02507,
>IDF
>Israel.
>
>2. Letters to Authorities
>It is recommended to send letters of protest on behalf of Yahel, preferably
>by fax, to:
>
>Mr. Shaul Mofaz,
>Minister of Defence,
>Ministry of Defence,
>37 Kaplan St.,
>Tel-Aviv 61909,
>Israel.
>E-mail: sar@mod.gov.il or pniot@mod.gov.il
>Fax: ++972-3-696-27-57 / ++972-3-691-69-40 / ++972-3-691-79-15
>
>Copies can be sent to the commander of the prison at:
>
>Commander of Military Prison No. 4,
>Military Prison No. 4,
>Military postal number 02507,
>IDF
>Israel.
>Fax: ++972-3-957-52-76
>
>Another useful address for sending copies would be the Military Attorney
>General:
>
>Chief Military Attorney
>Military postal code 9605
>IDF
>Israel
>Fax: ++972-3-569-43-70
>
>It would be especially useful to send your appeals to the Commander of the
>Induction Base in Tel-Hashomer. It is this officer that ultimately decides
>whether an objector is to be exempted from military service or sent to
>another round in prison:
>
>Commander of Induction Base,
>Baqum, Tel-Hashomer
>Military Postal Code 02718, IDF
>Israel.
>Fax: ++972-3-737-60-52
>
>Copies of appeals in can also be sent to:
>
>Head of Incompatibles Unit
>Induction Base (Baqum)
>Tel-Hashomer
>Military Postal Code 02718, IDF
>Israel.
>Fax: ++972-3-737-67-05.
>
>For those of you who live outside Israel, it would be very effective to send
>protests to your local Israeli embassy. You can find the address of your
>embassy on the web:
>http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfh/Eng/Ntz/N...p?seek=1&let=85
>
>Here is a sample letter, which you can use, or better adapt, in sending
>appeals to authorities on Yahel's behalf:
>
> Dear Sir/Madam,
>
> It has come to my attention that Yahel Avigur (military ID 7379352), a
>pacifist conscientious objector, has been imprisoned for the second time for
>his refusal to perform military service and is held in Military Prison No. 4
>in Tzrifin.
>
> The imprisonment of conscientious objectors such as Yahel Avigur is a
>violation of international law, of basic human rights and of plain morals.
>The repeated imprisonment of conscientious objectors is an especially grave
>offence, as it means sentencing a person more than once for the same
>offence, and has been judged by the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
>to constitute a clear case arbitrary detention.
>
> I therefore call for the immediate and unconditional release from prison
>of Yahel Avigur, without threat of further imprisonment in the future.
>
> Sincerely,
>
>3. Letters to media in Israel and in other countries
>Writing op-ed pieces and letters to editors of media in Israel and other
>countries could also be quite useful in supporting our effort to let the
>public know of Yahel Avigur's imprisonment, and in indirectly but powerfully
>pressuring the military authorities to let go of him.
>
>Here are some contact details for the main media outlets in Israel:
>Ma'ariv:
>2 Karlibach st.
>Tel-Aviv 67132
>Israel
>Fax: +972-3-561-06-14
>e-mail: editor@maariv.co.il
>
>Yedioth Aharonoth:
>2 Moses st.
>Tel-Aviv
>Israel
>Fax: +972-3-608-25-46
>
>Ha'aretz (Hebrew):
>21 Schocken st.
>Tel-Aviv, 61001
>Israel
>Fax: +972-3-681-00-12
>
>Ha'aretz (English edition):
>21 Schocken st.
>Tel-Aviv, 61001
>Israel
>Fax: +972-3-512-11-56
>e-mail: letters@haaretz.co.il
>
>Jerusalem Post:
>P.O. Box 81
>Jerusalem 91000
>Israel
>Fax: +972-2-538-95-27
>e-mail: news@jpost.co.il or letters@jpost.co.il
>
>Radio (fax numbers):
>
>Kol-Israel +972-2-531-33-15 and +972-3-694-47-09
>Galei Tzahal +972-3-512-67-20
>
>Television (fax numbers):
>
>Channel 1 +972-2-530-15-36
>Channel 2 +972-2-533-98-09
>
>
>Thank you,
>Sergeiy Sandler - New Profile.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Sirotnikov
|
 |
<--- Yes, It's a "kitty" in a boot.
Feb 2000
time: 07:36
|
|
quote:
Why? Who are you (royal) to define patriotic duty? Perhaps he thinks that serving in the Israeli army is unpatriotic and ultimately damaging to the state? |
It is patriotic duty since the army's definition is to defend the citizens of the state. Whether it is doing it right or wrong, whether it is too agressive or not active enough is another question.
However deciding one does not wish to aid his country at all is unpatriotic. Patriotism is about caring for your countrymen, and caring for you country and what it stands for.
quote:
You can certainly make that argument and call it a strong patriotic argument. Furthermore, since when was "patriotism" a civil requirement in that respect? And how exactly is it fair? |
Service in the army was declared a civil duty by the state, and until it is changed to a professional army, it is everyone's duty - morally and legaly.
Who is exactly suppose to defend Yehiel's sorry ass, when a terrorist comes to hunt for him and his teen-age girlfriends in a nightclub?
Why should some people who are in the army loose sleep over his life, when he's not willing to go to the army, even if it is a non-combat duty?
quote:
By virtue of his citizenship he is obliged to essentially put his life in the hands of others? That's not a free society by any measure. |
Of course it is a free society.
A free society doesn't mean that you are free do to whatever you want!
Any society has rights a person enjoys and duties he must fulfill. A free society is a society which allows you personal freedom and defends it, and it is a society where you can affect and change the laws in it.
There are no societies without duties - people join societies to enojoy certain rights. The fulfilment of those by the state, requires dirty work to be done by someone. In earlier times, everyone in a society were "free" and the dirty chores were done by slaves (non-free). Now there are duties shared by all people of the society. Sound much more fair to me.
This is just like refusing to pay your taxes - this is something the society is based on - the common taxing of wealth and pay in order to do organized good for the benefit of society.
quote:
I can understand it being a requirement for those that choose Israeli citizenship but for those born there, they're citizens by default. |
Yes - but that doesn't mean that they only have rights and not duties. Someone has to protect the society. Someone has to pay taxes.
If he's not interested he's got two options:
1. leave
2. sit in prison
quote:
And finally, and perhaps most obviously, maybe he doesn't share the "omfg let's kill the terrorists while we pay our respects to the Stern gang" attitude. Is it not "fair" that he should not have that opinion? |
He's welcome to his opinion. It is pathetic that he's *****ing about sitting in jail for something he knows is against the law.
I'm also waiting to see how he's going to defend people by planting flowers all over the Galilee 
Not to mention there are zillions of different army roles most of which are non-combat and often have no connection to combat.
He could go on to become an army teacher and help teach Israelis who are lacking education or new immigrants who ended up in the army without ackuiring the full skills needed.
You also have alot to learn about killing terrorist, as well as about the Stern gang.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Whaleboy
|
 |
Please make all cheques payable to Whaleboy
Jan 2003
time: 05:36
|
|
quote:
It is patriotic duty since the army's definition is to defend the citizens of the state. Whether it is doing it right or wrong, whether it is too agressive or not active enough is another question.
However deciding one does not wish to aid his country at all is unpatriotic. Patriotism is about caring for your countrymen, and caring for you country and what it stands for.
|
A simplistic view, because the army is simply the instrument of political policy, and unless you are advocating a dictatorial, militaristic government you cannot make that argument, and if you are it somewhat defeats the point no? If he believes that the activities of the army are detrimental to his nation, then to him they are not in the interests of that country and so he can, with full patriotism, be a conscientious objector.
quote:
Service in the army was declared a civil duty by the state, and until it is changed to a professional army, it is everyone's duty - morally and legaly.
|
Do tell, how exactly is it a moral obligation now? Would you say it is a universalisable and categorical act, or would you suggest that the ends justify the means? If you are to claim that it is virtuous behaviour I would ask you to elaborate.
quote:
Why should some people who are in the army loose sleep over his life, when he's not willing to go to the army, even if it is a non-combat duty?
|
Is the army supposed to defend Israeli citizens, irrespective of whether or not they like them? Should I or others not be defended by the British army, because I do not choose to fight? Obviously I should, so what is the only difference? That is of course conscription, but then, are you saying that Israeli citizenship is worth less than British? As a Jew, and a pacifist, they're hardly tempting me to migrate... but is that not the point? I sometimes get the feeling from some Zionists that being Jewish precludes being a pacifist. Some people need to think about the implications of what they are saying  .
quote:
A free society doesn't mean that you are free do to whatever you want!
Any society has rights a person enjoys and duties he must fulfill. A free society is a society which allows you personal freedom and defends it, and it is a society where you can affect and change the laws in it.
There are no societies without duties - people join societies to enojoy certain rights. The fulfilment of those by the state, requires dirty work to be done by someone. In earlier times, everyone in a society were "free" and the dirty chores were done by slaves (non-free). Now there are duties shared by all people of the society. Sound much more fair to me.
This is just like refusing to pay your taxes - this is something the society is based on - the common taxing of wealth and pay in order to do organized good for the benefit of society.
|
So now you are defending conscription? There is a fundamental difference between paying taxes and filling in Census forms every decade, and submitting your own liberties to join the armed forces, where you do not have free speech, do not have the right of insubordination, do not have the same political individualism as a civilian, and may be placed in harms way, a kill-or-be-killed situation or worse, against your will. That's not freedom. And don't tell me there's no other way, there's no conscription in the UK or US is there? Where conscription may be called upon in a time of emergency, being a conscientious objector is not a legal offence.
quote:
Someone has to protect the society.
|
With Israeli nationalism and the threat of attack spurring the people to band together in a glorious struggle for the future of Zion, and the quantity of cash flowing into Israel, I shouldn't imagine that self-defence would be a particular problem if they have a professional army . Bare in mind the huge economic drain of conscription... the armed forces are an economic black hole, consuming resources and people, who could be out contributing and paying taxes.
quote:
If he's not interested he's got two options:
1. leave
2. sit in prison
|
Not acceptable. If he's a citizen by default the burden of proof is on the state to show why if he does not join the army he must either revoke his citizenship or be incarcerated, not merely claim that "those are the rules". The situation for people that would move to live in Israel is a little different, because their choice is
a) Do it our way
b) Bugger off
If they are already citizens, then the rest of my argument applies, since it is Israel's move, not theirs.
quote:
He's welcome to his opinion. It is pathetic that he's *****ing about sitting in jail for something he knows is against the law.
|
What kind of argument is that? The same was said of Mandela and the like.
quote:
I'm also waiting to see how he's going to defend people by planting flowers all over the Galilee
|
Here's a good one... stop pissing off the Arabs
quote:
Not to mention there are zillions of different army roles most of which are non-combat and often have no connection to combat.
|
I myself would never want to be in a combat role, nor would I want to be in a role that directly supports that.
quote:
You also have alot to learn about killing terrorist, as well as about the Stern gang.
|
You deny that the Stern gang and others were terrorists?
Terrorism is best studied in terms of sociology, not "point and click" militarism. The military is more a political instrument, pawns of the government in the game of democracy. If they genuinely wanted to protect Israeli lives, there would have been peace a generation ago.
Boshko 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sirotnikov
|
|
<--- Yes, It's a "kitty" in a boot.
Feb 2000
time: 07:36
|
|
quote:
Unless, of course, you're Ulta-orthdox. Which, of course, is only fair, after all only certain people should be able to get out of military service because of philosophical objections to it. |
I'm obviously against that. But the fact that one groups has bullied itself to pay less to society, doesn't mean I want more people to do it. Mind you I voted for Shinui, whose goal is to end the extra-priveleges orthodox jews recieve from the state.
quote:
A simplistic view, because the army is simply the instrument of political policy, and unless you are advocating a dictatorial, militaristic government you cannot make that argument, and if you are it somewhat defeats the point no? If he believes that the activities of the army are detrimental to his nation, then to him they are not in the interests of that country and so he can, with full patriotism, be a conscientious objector. |
That's a good one. So you follow the rules only if you agree with the policy behind it?
That is some great thinking. So whenever social democrats come to power, I will begin disobeying any laws they make, and I will evade the higher taxes - because after all - I feel it would be unpatriotic of me to follow laws which I think will hurt my country!
quote:
Do tell, how exactly is it a moral obligation now? Would you say it is a universalisable and categorical act, or would you suggest that the ends justify the means? If you are to claim that it is virtuous behaviour I would ask you to elaborate.
|
Categorical act - If everyone were not to serve in the army if they liked, there would be no functional army - and Israel would be left defenseless.
I see no way in which the ends justifies the means with regarding to this issue.
quote:
Is the army supposed to defend Israeli citizens, irrespective of whether or not they like them? Should I or others not be defended by the British army, because I do not choose to fight? Obviously I should, so what is the only difference? |
I'm not saying he shouldn't.
I'm saying his refusal to share the duty, while other people are defending him is immoral and unkind to his fellow countrymen.
quote:
I sometimes get the feeling from some Zionists that being Jewish precludes being a pacifist. Some people need to think about the implications of what they are saying |
I have no idea what lead you to this, and I fail to understand the logic of your previous sentances at all.
I don't disaprove his wishes to be pacifist. But he must be aware that if he chooses his own wishes above the law - the law wins. That and I personally think pacifists are stupid, based on my belief that people are born unkind to one another and the "natural existance" is when people attempt to bully and exploit each other.
quote:
So now you are defending conscription? There is a fundamental difference between paying taxes and filling in Census forms every decade, and submitting your own liberties to join the armed forces, where you do not have free speech, do not have the right of insubordination, do not have the same political individualism as a civilian, and may be placed in harms way, a kill-or-be-killed situation or worse, against your will. That's not freedom. And don't tell me there's no other way, there's no conscription in the UK or US is there? Where conscription may be called upon in a time of emergency, being a conscientious objector is not a legal offence. |
Army conscription is for 2-3 years. Paying taxes is for life. With the high taxes in Israel, you pay around 50% of your income to the state. Both are needed evils - since Israel is a small country, but needs to provide all the "rights" people want, like good health care and security.
The government has decided that conscription is necessary for Israel, and until that decision is democratically changed in the Knesset, it is the law - whether one likes it or not.
Furthermore- it is obviously needed, as being a small vulneralbe country, sorrounded by enemies with much larger armies - Israel would not be able to function properly with only a professional army, in a major scale war.
quote:
With Israeli nationalism and the threat of attack spurring the people to band together in a glorious struggle for the future of Zion, and the quantity of cash flowing into Israel, I shouldn't imagine that self-defence would be a particular problem if they have a professional army. |
Other than a huge lump of stereotypes, this paragraph is good for nothing.
quote:
Bare in mind the huge economic drain of conscription... the armed forces are an economic black hole, consuming resources and people, who could be out contributing and paying taxes.
|
Yes, I agree, 18-21 year olds have huge taxing potencial... if you tax playboy magazine and playstation.
quote:
Not acceptable. If he's a citizen by default the burden of proof is on the state to show why if he does not join the army he must either revoke his citizenship or be incarcerated, not merely claim that "those are the rules". |
Since when does the state come to you and prove you that you have to follow the law? Either you do, or you sit in prison.
quote:
What kind of argument is that? The same was said of Mandela and the like. |
Great idea - lets compare everyone in prison to Mandella.
Next time the police arrests some vandalists who do not believe in private property or a killer who sincerely doesn't respect human life, I'll go marching to the court room and say "Mr Judge, we can't judge those people by their beliefs! It'll be like judging Mandella!".
quote:
Here's a good one... stop pissing off the Arabs |
Yes, that's a viable strategy. Obviously the single thought every Israeli should have in mind is how not to piss off the arabs...
This is generally a great recipe for national security - don't piss off your enemies. Having it worked so well in the 1930s, Israel is built on another concept: Be stronger than all your enemies together, and have them know that.
I'd rather piss off the arabs (or any other nationality) and keep having Israel as a strong viable and democratic country. Ok?
quote:
I myself would never want to be in a combat role, nor would I want to be in a role that directly supports that. |
Why? Because you don't believe in armed conflict at all?
Or because you're unwilling to risk your life for a goal you care about? Or is there nothing you care about that much?
quote:
You deny that the Stern gang and others were terrorists? |
Yes I do.
Their attacks on the brittish army were guerilla attacks and were acceptable as they were targetted against an army or a government - not against random british civilians.
The fighting between Jewish and Arab militant groups indeed qualify as "terrorism" however, due to the circumstances of both sides engaging in it - it is better to define it as an ethnical conflict fueled by both sides, which took alot of atrocities from both sides. If you wish to classify it as "Terrorism" - you may.
This does not, however, hold for the arab attacks on 1920, 1921 and 1929, before Jewish reprisals began.
quote:
Terrorism is best studied in terms of sociology, not "point and click" militarism. The military is more a political instrument, pawns of the government in the game of democracy. |
Terrorism is not best studied in terms of sociology.
It is a successful military tactic developed by several revolutionary resistance groups in the 20th century, which bases itself on use of the media, concealment among civilians, low intensity warfare and so on.
If you wish - war is well studied in terms of sociology. Terrorism is not a random phenomena. It is always well organized and funded.
quote:
If they genuinely wanted to protect Israeli lives, there would have been peace a generation ago. |
This possibly, is the silliest thing you've said during the entire length of the thread.
Or, possibly your definition of peace is a single palestinian state, and no Israel - in which case I wouldn't call it stupid but rather anti-semitic - as you'd be denying the right for an existance of a Jewish state in Israel. Mind you, I don't deny the right for existance of a Palestinian state - and neither has any Israeli prime minister in a generation.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Edan
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
quote:
Unless, of course, you're Ulta-orthdox. Which, of course, is only fair, after all only certain people should be able to get out of military service because of philosophical objections to it. |
Yep... if you are truely the 'Chosen' you get more rights than everyone else... only fair, right? |
Uh, you do realize that Israeli Muslims are not forced to serve, either, right?
Not that Orthodox are any more "chosen", nor is "chosen" meant to be indicate as a sign of being better or given more rights.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:36.
Apolyton Time is 00:36. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-03-2005 13:36
|