Refusing Israeli government-sponsored trip

Earlier this month, professional football star Michael Bennett made headlines when he pulled out of an Israeli government-sponsored trip to Israel for NFL players. In an open letter, Bennett, who plays for the Seattle Seahawks, wrote, “One of my heroes has always been Muhammad Ali. I know that Ali always stood strongly with the Palestinian people, visiting refugee camps, going to rallies, and always willing to be a ‘voice for the voiceless.’ I want to be a ‘voice for the voiceless’ and I cannot do that by going on this kind of trip to Israel.” Bennett’s words struck a chord with his teammates. In the end, only five out of the original 13 players ended up traveling as ambassadors of goodwill for Israel.

Michael Bennett talking:

I decided not to go because, you know, doing some—my research on Palestine and Israel and all the things that were going on, I’ve seen so many similarities between the Black Lives movement and the Palestinian movement. And, you know, I figured if I was going to go to Israel, I should be able to go see both sides. And, you know, I didn’t want to be an ambassador for a certain government if I wasn’t sure if I agree with everything the government was doing. So I thought it would be better to go on my own time, you know, and figure out my own situation when I get there.

they contacted us during the last year in the summertime, and, you know, they were talking about this trip. And I thought it was just more of like a trip that you get to go see Israel. I didn’t know it was like an ambassador trip and all the extra stuff. So, you know, once I found out about that, some of my friends called me and was like, “Oh, did you know this? And did you know that?” And when they called me, I just decided to—you know, I was like, “Oh, well, I can’t. I can’t do this. I don’t want to be an ambassador for something that I don’t agree with.”

I feel like there were some people that thought I was anti-Semitic, and so they were like getting mad. And I was like, “No, I’m not against any Jewish people or any—I’m not against anybody, when it comes to people.” But, you know, they seemed—they thought I was anti-Semitic. But I wasn’t. You know, I was just saying that when I do go to Israel, I would love to see Palestine, too.

And, you know, I got a lot of great things. I think a lot of people tweeted, emailed all kinds of things and said they were proud, you know, that an athlete stood for something that was going on in the world. And I think when the things that are going on in America at the same time, the things that are going around the whole world and Palestine, all across, and, you know, I just wanted to be—if I do be an ambassador, it’ll be for the goodwill of the world, the things that are going on around the world. And they’re so similar to the things that are going on in America, whether we’re talking about Ferguson or we’re talking about Baltimore or Eric Garner. Just, you know, there’s a lot of things that are going on here that are similar to things that are going on in Palestine. And once I did so much research and started reading and seeing the similarities, I knew that I couldn’t go on this trip.

Muhammad Ali, “My conscience won’t let me go shoot my brother or some darker people, some poor, hungry people in the mud, for big, powerful America. And shoot them for what? They never called me nigger. They never lynched me. They didn’t put no dogs on me. They didn’t rob me of my nationality and rape and kill my mother and father. Why would I want to—shoot them for what? I got to go shoot them, those little poor little black people, little babies and children, women. How can I shoot them poor people? Just take me to jail.”

I think that Muhammad Ali is an inspiration for all athletes to, you know, use their platform for good. And I think, as an athlete, a lot of times, you know, you get caught in the marketing situation where you’re marketing for so many brands that you forget that you are a person and that there’s things that’s going on that, with just some words that you speak, you can inspire young kids to make decisions, or you could bring awareness to things that are going on. So, Muhammad Ali, he just inspires me just to be the voice for the voiceless, like, you know, to be able to use my platform. And this generation is so different from back then, when, you know, protesting and rallies and all kinds of things, you had to go out and find 500,000 people and get them to follow you and do all this kind of things to share your message. But now, you know, just with the click of a button on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, you can reach a million people, and you can share your message. And when you share your message, you can change a lot of lives.

when John Carlos did that, I don’t think the world was ready for what he did. I think now the world is ready for change. You see so many different people, of all different ethnicities, marching, doing everything together. And I think, with technology, you know, you can share your message. I think when he did that, I think, you know, repercussions of what he did, I thought, yeah, it probably hindered his career or the things that happened to him, but ultimately, like you said—I mean, I think in sports sometime, people, you know, identify with the—your legacy with how many touchdowns you get, how many yards you score or how many medals you win, how many dunks you get, how many grand slams you win. But, ultimately, I feel like your legacy is definitely, you know, how many kids you can reach in your community, how much change can you make, because at the end of the day, the records are being broken, but that fist that he held up is still staying the same. It’s a stagnant picture forever. People remember that fist being something. People don’t remember who won the 1979 gold medal or the 1985 gold medal, but they remember that moment when he put his fist up.

Dave Zirin talking:

I think Michael Bennett is a person of uncommon character. I think folks hear that. But while he’s a person of uncommon character, he is also a part of a wave of athletes who are speaking out right now and have been speaking out over the last several years. And I think this is happening because of a perfect storm of reasons, everything from the influence of the Black Lives Matter movement to the influence of social media, to the fact that there are just people in the streets right now absolutely fed up with what’s happening both in this country and in the world. And we have to remember that athletes don’t live in this hermetically sealed chamber apart from this, like Michael Bennett spoke about. I mean, he has daughters, and there is a misogynist and sexual harasser in the White House. You can’t be apart from that. Or the fact that, you know, Michael Bennett is somebody who reads the work of Angela Davis. I know that about Michael. And Angela Davis just wrote a book called Freedom is a Constant Struggle, that connects the issues of Ferguson and Palestine.

we can’t speak about the issue—as Angela Davis argues, we can’t speak about Black Lives Matter in this country without looking at it globally. And that’s what Michael Bennett did, in terms of applying that political analysis to this trip, that was being sent over to hype brand Israel and create goodwill ambassadors. So these things are connected to much broader struggles, but at the same time, it still takes those individuals, just like John Carlos raising his fist in 1968, just like Colin Kaepernick taking that knee. It still takes those individuals who are willing to stand up and speak out and share with the world what it is they’re learning and experiencing. And that’s what makes Michael Bennett unique, but at the same time, as we’re seeing, courage is contagious. So when Michael Bennett speaks out, you see the ripple effect across the NFL, across the sports world and across sports fandom, as well.

Michael Bennett talking:

to be honest, I really didn’t think that that movement would be coming from Colin Kaepernick. I thought it would probably be coming from somewhere else in the NFL. I just—I think I was blindsided when it was him. Like, when it was him who made that decision to—you know, to do it, I was like, “Wow! Kaepernick is like—he’s like on a whole ‘nother level right now. He’s trying to change—he’s trying to make a conversation about something that should have been had a conversation about a long time ago.” And when he took that knee, it just—it just made me realize that, you know, when he did that and the way that he touched—made people speak around the world about this, it was like, “Wow! Athletes really do have this platform that a lot of people just want to hear.” And when he made that decision to do that, I think it changed a lot of lives. I think it brought out some ugliness in people, but it also brought out some beauty in some people. And I think, for us, for me personally, it just challenged me to be—to even, you know, join him and try to make it—try to make everything in his message more—make it where people understand it and they want to be a part of it, where young kids are speaking about it, too.

For me, the greatest thing about what he did wasn’t that the adults were having a conversation about it; it was that the young people were having a conversation about it. It was the 10-year-old, 9-year-old teams. You know, they’re not even getting paid in the NFL, and they just—they’re fearless. They’re taking a knee. And they don’t even know—they understand why they’re taking a knee, but at the same time, they really don’t understand the magnitude of what they’re doing. And then you take the middle school teams that are taking a knee, and there’s not even a lot of fans in the stadium, but they’re taking that knee. And you see high school people doing it, and you see college people doing it. Then you see guys in the NFL doing it. And it’s like, man, that started a fire. And the greatest thing was that the young kids were aware, starting to be awoke about things that are going on, and more aware. And I thought that was the coolest part about all of it. It was that the young people—the seed that he planted with the young people, it started growing, and it caught—started growing like fire and just started growing like weeds everywhere. And it was special. I think that, you know, he did something really special. And really, it all started with a knee. And that’s the funniest part about it. And I think it was—I think it was a great—and it was a great thing.

– students at Mizzou, at the University of Missouri, Black Lives Matter activists demanding change, ultimately toppled their president when the college football team said they wouldn’t play until the president left.

What those kids did was, and Missouri, was the truth of it all: People are the power. I think people have so much power when they connect together and they have a belief in something. I think, truly, if you look at all the great philosophers or the people that wrote—the people there before us, the revolutionaries, the people that wanted to create change—and, you know, they talk about solidarity. And to have solidarity among young people to really, you know, put their minds together and join together and say, “Look, this is going to change. This is what’s going to change,” and come and go and force the president out, I think that was—that was just the most amazing thing of the whole year.

Angela Davis is just a—besides my wife, I just—I just love everything about her. I think when you have a person that, you know, speaks their mind no matter what, regardless of the backlash to—and the things that she’s been through. I mean, there’s a lot of times that people talk to you, but they’ve never been through anything, and they never really fought that fight. They just speak about it. But I think, for her, she actually genuinely is on the ground daily. Her daily fight, her daily struggle, her daily everything, is to make change in life. Whether it’s in Australia for women’s—for women in jail, whether it’s here for political prisoners, whether it’s here for Black Lives Matter, whether it’s in Palestine, it’s just her whole life is about how to create change. And I think that’s important.

I think she just encourages me to be able to, you know, really dedicate my life to try to make change. And it really—really, everything else doesn’t really matter if there’s always a system that keeps certain people down. Nothing really matters if—how many touchdowns I score, if another black kid is shot and killed. Doesn’t matter how many sacks I get, if the education system is unfair for black youth or people of color youth. Doesn’t matter how many times I hit Tom Brady or any other quarterback, if there’s a wall being built. You know what I mean? So, and she just gives me power to just go out there and just speak how I feel, you know, also educate myself on the things.

I mean, I think she’s just a great role model for young women, even if you don’t agree with her message or you don’t agree with the things that she says. But you cannot—you can’t disagree with her courage. You can’t disagree with her ability to speak and make a movement. You can’t disagree with her ability to organize. And I think that’s what young people have to really look up to her, is how do we organize, how do we come together and try to create change. And I think with her doing all the things she’s done, it just motivates us to just keep growing and know that there is a possibility that we can link up as people, not even looking at color. We’re just looking to link and connect as people and growing and try to make change and not let, you know, the government do what they want to us, you know, give us a chance to go out there and just speak our mind and get the young people to take a step forward. I think she’s just a courageous person. And I get goosebumps whenever I talk—you know, whenever I talk to her or if I just listen to her messages that she spoke or if I’m just reading the book. You know, reading one of her books, it just motivates me.

this country was built on immigrants, if you think, from African Americans coming from Africa, being enslaved and building all the things that they built, you know, the White House, all the things that they built. Then you go to the Asians. They’re here. They built all the railroads, built all the things on the West Coast. The Spanish, who built all these different things. And Native Americans, who built all these different things. To the labor on the backs of slaves and the labor of immigrants. And I think, at this point, you know, they should definitely not be kicked out, because they’re the ones who built this place.

I think this is a time—and there’s been so many different times where there’s been so many times for movements, whether it’s in the ’60s, you know, during World War II or during Vietnam or during all these different times, you know, civil rights movements and all these movements. And I think this is a time where people are coming to agreeance that we’re all just human beings, and we’re all part of the system, and it takes all of us to grow. So, the resistance to trying to divide us, no, I’m not surprised in it. I’m actually encouraged, and I’m just happy that everybody is starting to come together and have that full circle.
Michael Bennett
Seattle Seahawks defensive end.

Dave Zirin
sports editor for The Nation magazine. He is also the host of Edge of Sports.

— source

How Israel Is Turning into an Apartheid-Like State

President Donald Trump on Wednesday ended a long-standing U.S. commitment to the establishment of a Palestinian state, saying he had no preference for either a one-state or two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The remarks came as Trump welcomed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to the White House, and represented a break from 20 years of official U.S. support for an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel.

Glenn Greenwald talking:

I guess I question, first of all, the extent to which it really is such a massive change in U.S. policy. It is, of course, a huge departure rhetorically from what the U.S. government has said for decades, which is that their policy is there ought to be a two-state solution. The reality, though, as any honest person involved in this conflict or who watches it admits, is that the two-state solution has been dying, and, in fact, probably dead for many years. It’s just that nobody wants to admit it. If you look at a map, it’s almost impossible to see where a separate Palestinian state in the West Bank can be created, given the growth of settlements under Prime Minister Netanyahu, growth which, by the way, the United States not only didn’t stop, but abetted by shoveling Israel with money, with weapons, with all kinds of diplomatic support, as they were expanding those settlements. Yes, they objected occasionally, in rhetoric, but, in action, never did.

And so, I think the two-state solution is something that we’re all eager not to give up on, because the alternatives are both so bad. But the reality is that in Israel there is an erosion of support for the two-state solution. There are high-level members of President—Prime Minister Netanyahu’s Cabinet, high ministers, who explicitly oppose it. The reality is that because of the course Israel has taken, the only two options that are real—and it’s essentially what Donald Trump, in his own kind of stumbling, inept, ignorant way, was getting at, was the only two options are: have Israel become an apartheid state, where a minority of Jews have political rights and control a country in which a majority of citizens have no political rights, exactly like was true of apartheid South Africa, or have one state in which all citizens have political rights, in which case Israel would no longer exist as a Jewish state. Neither of those options are good ones, but that is the course that Israel is taking. And what Trump is saying is, essentially, if the Israelis and Palestinians want a certain solution, we, the United States, are not going to prevent them from doing that.

What is really worrying is that Donald Trump is empowering some of the worst extremists in the world when it comes to Israeli policy. His son-in-law, who’s in charge of it, is a supporter of some of the hardest-core settlements in the West Bank. And Congress is taking up this week his nomination of a hardcore pro-settlement lunatic to be the U.S. ambassador to Israel. Just this morning, five ambassadors, former ambassadors to Israel, of both parties, came out and opposed him on the grounds that he’s essentially insane. And so, I do think there’s a dangerous tilting toward extremists in Israel on the part of the Trump administration. But the two-state solution has really only existed in rhetoric for a long time. And on some level, a lot of supporters of Palestinian rights think it’s actually a good thing to finally have that candid admission that a two-state solution is not really possible anymore because of Israeli behavior.

Glenn Greenwald
Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and one of the founding editors of The Intercept. His recent piece for The Intercept is headlined “The Leakers Who Exposed Gen. Flynn’s Lie Committed Serious—and Wholly Justified—Felonies.”

— source

Europe’s Largest Pension Funds Heavily Invested in Illegal Israeli Settlements

Europe’s five largest pension funds have €7.5 billion invested in companies with business activities in and around illegal settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories. This is at odds with United Nations guidelines, clear warnings from 18 European countries, and undermines the two-state solution, experts warn.

European investors have billions of euro invested in companies with activities in and around illegal Israeli settlements, according to a new investigation from Danwatch that screened the investment portfolios of Europe’s top five pension fund managers.

Statens pensjonsfond utland (Oljefondet) (NO), Stichting Pensioenfonds ABP (NE), Pensioenfonds Zorg en Welzijn (NE), Arbejdsmarkedets Tillægspension (DK), and Alecta Pensionsförsäkring (SE) have a total of €7.5 billion invested in 36 Israeli and international publicly-traded companies, most of which have long been under public scrutiny because of their activities in the occupied Palestinian territories.

Hugh Lovatt, expert on Israel and Palestine at the respected think-tank European Council on Foreign Relations, explains the problem with settlements:

“Israeli settlements in the occupied territories are illegal and have led to the dispossession of Palestinians and the fragmentation of Palestinian land. They infringe on Palestinian rights and exploit Palestinian natural resources.”

Business activities in and around settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories are not necessarily against the law, but according to the United Nations, investors are obliged to carry out enhanced due diligence and to demonstrate that their activities do not contribute to negative effects on human rights.
Warning from European governments

In addition, 18 European countries warn their citizens and businesses in no uncertain terms against undertaking financial and economic activities that could support illegal Israeli settlements.

“Financial transactions, investments, purchases, tenders, and other economic activities (including services like tourism) in Israeli settlements or benefiting Israeli settlements are associated with legal and economic risks due to the fact that, according to international law, the Israeli settlements are built on occupied land and are not recognised as a lawful part of Israel’s territory,” wrote the Danish Foreign Ministry in a 2014 statement similar to statements published by other countries.

“One should also be aware of possible violations of international humanitarian law and human rights,” the statement warns and refers to OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (2011) and United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human rights (2011).
Undermining the two-state solution

In addition to the “increased risk of adverse human rights impacts”, as the UN puts it, European investors are also actively undermining the official policy of the EU regarding a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

“When European investors finance, fund or facilitate the settlement enterprise and illegal actions in the occupied Palestinian territories, they are contributing to the undermining of the two-state solution and therefore the undermining of the EU’s own foreign policy objectives,” [said] Policy fellow Hugh Lovatt at the European Council for Foreign Relations states to Danwatch.

“And these investments are illegal under international law – or at least very problematic – and exposes European investors to reputational, financial and legal risks,” says Lovatt.

Investments in companies with business activities in and around settlements tie European investors to potential violations of international humanitarian law and Palestinians’ human rights.

Lars Erslev Andersen, a senior researcher at the Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS), agrees that it is problematic when companies have activities in settlements.

“In my opinion, businesses that have branches or factories in the occupied Palestinian territories help to maintain the occupation and facilitate Israel’s continued construction of settlements, infrastructure and security apparatus in the West Bank,” Andersen tells Danwatch.

“This is problematic, because it undermines the two-state solution, which is gradually becoming an illusion for a great number of people,” [said] Lars Erslev Andersen, senior researcher at DIIS.

Norwegian fund biggest investor

The largest single investor by far is Statens Pensjonsfond Utland, the Government Pension Fund of Norway, with €5.2 billion out of the total €7.5 billion invested in all 36 companies on Danwatch’s list.

This includes €135 million in Caterpillar, which supplies bulldozers for the demolition of Palestinian homes in the occupied territories; €286 million in HeidelbergCement, which has been blacklisted by several other European investors due to exploitation of Palestinian natural resources; and €1.5 billion in Siemens, which has installed traffic systems on Israeli roads in the West Bank and placed bids on projects on occupied territory with Israel Railways.

The Norwegian Government Pension Fund also has €233 million in five Israeli banks financing settlement construction and operating in the West Bank in various ways: Bank Hapoalim, Bank Leumi, First International Bank of Israel Ltd, Israel Discount Bank Ltd and Mizrahi Tefahot Bank Ltd.

These same banks are blacklisted by Europe’s third largest pension fund Pensioenfonds Zorg en Welzijn (PFZW) (NE) which in 2014 ended several years of dialogue.

“Given the day-to-day reality and domestic legal framework they operate in, the banks have limited to no possibilities to end their involvement in the financing of settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories,” wrote PFZW (formerly PGGM) about the decision to divest from Bank Hapoalim, Bank Leumi, First International Bank of Israel, Israel Discount Bank and Mizrahi Tefahot because they finance settlements and operate branches on occupied territory.

Danwatch asked The Norwegian Government Pension Fund specific questions about each of their investments in the 36 specific companies, but received no specific reply. Instead the fund answers in general terms about how they expect companies they invest in to strive to observe “the G20/OECD Principles of Corporate Governance, the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, and the UN Global Compact.”

“Our expectations are especially relevant for companies with direct operations, supply chains or other business relationships in high-risk sectors, high-risk geographical areas, or otherwise high-risk operational environments,” they explain.

The Norwegian oil fund’s decisions about excluding specific companies is regulated by an independent council appointed by the Norwegian Ministry of Finance.

New findings will be considered

Of the five largest European pension funds, Denmark’s ATP is by far the smallest investor in companies on Danwatch’s list, with about €1 million in total in Siemens and The Priceline Group Inc, the owner of, which facilitates hotels in a number of settlements. However, ATP’s publicly available stock portfolio does not include index futures, which amounts to almost 95% of ATP’s entire foreign holdings.

On the two specific investments, ATP explains that Danwatch’s findings includes new information not covered by their external screening partner, and that they will have to consider this before they can answer specific questions.

Sweden’s largest pension fund, and Europe’s fifth-largest, Alecta Pensionsförsäkring, only has investments in one company on Danwatch’s list: Volvo Group. The Swedish industrial conglomerate partly owns Merkavim, which provides armoured busses for Egged bus lines in the West Bank, where Volvo busses are also used for transport. Two Volvo-certified garages operate in the illegal industrial zones of Mishor Adumim and Atarot in the occupied West Bank. Furthermore, Volvo excavators are used by the Israeli army to demolish Palestinian houses on occupied land, as documented in February, April and October 2016 in the Palestinian villages of Jinba, Halaweh, Um Al Kher and in the Jordan Valley. Danwatch presented these findings to Volvo Group, but received no reply.

On the subject of house demolitions, Volvo Group stated in 2011 that “Volvo neither can nor wants to take a position in international conflicts […] We regret if they are used for destructive purposes, but it does not stop us from believing that our excavators and vehicles largely play a part in making the world a little better.”

Alecta Pensionsförsäkring explains to Danwatch that their due diligence is outsourced to external partner GES, and that GES confirm their knowledge about the issue and have concluded that Volvo Group’s activities is not a breach against international conventions.

“Volvo has limited possibilities to influence how their products are used and we believe that Volvo cannot be directly linked to human rights violations,” Swedish investor Alecta therefore tells Danwatch.

“Alecta has an active and ongoing dialogue with Volvo as well as with our external partner GES and has so far not received any indication pointing towards an exclusion. If necessary we will as a first priority engage further in our dialogue with Volvo to make them comply with international law, rather than exclude them as an investment,” Alecta says.

Danwatch also contacted the two Dutch pension funds Stichting Pensioenfonds ABP and Pensioenfonds Zorg en Welzijn (PFZW), but received no reply.

— source By Mikkel Bahl, Hanan Chemlali & Kristoffer Marslev