Saturday, December 03, 2016
Tuesday, November 29, 2016
Sunday, November 20, 2016
Friday, October 07, 2016
Sunday, September 11, 2016
Wednesday, July 06, 2016
Thursday, June 30, 2016
Tuesday, May 24, 2016
Thursday, May 05, 2016
Saturday, April 09, 2016
Antony See - Google+
Antony See - Googl
Thousands of Iraq, Afghan war vets sickened after working at 'burn pits'
February 4, 2013: U.S. Army soldiers watch garbage burn in a burn-pit at Forward Operating Base Azzizulah in the Kandahar Province of Afghanistan.
Thousands of U.S. military personnel who served on bases in Iraq and Afghanistan recall the dense black smoke from burn pits where everything from IEDs to human waste was incinerated.
Now many have died, and more are gravely ill. Those battling a grim menu of cancers, as well as their loved ones and advocates, trace their condition to breathing in the toxic fumes they say could be the most recent wars' version of Agent Orange or Gulf War Illness.
“The clouds of smoke would just hang throughout the base,” Army Sgt. Daniel Diaz, who was stationed at Joint Base Balad, in Iraq's Sunni Triangle from 2004-2005, told FoxNews.com. “No one ever gave it any thought. You are just so focused on the mission at hand. In my mind, I was just getting ready for the fight.”
Diaz returned from duty in 2008. A year later, he started developing health problems including cancer, chronic fatigue and weakness, neuropathy and hypothyroidism. Nearly every base he was stationed at during his four tours in Iraq and Afghanistan had burn pits nearby - and pungent smoke everywhere.
During the wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan, the burn pit method was adopted originally as a temporary measure to get rid of waste and garbage generated on bases. Everything was incinerated in the pits, say soldiers, including plastics, batteries, appliances, medicine, dead animals and even human waste. The items were often set ablaze with jet fuel as the accelerant.
Joint Base Balad, where Diaz was partially stationed, burned up to 147 tons of waste per day as recently as the summer of 2008, according to The Army Times.
The incineration of the waste generated numerous pollutants including carbon monoxide and dioxide—the same chemical compound found in Agent Orange, which left many Vietnam vets sick after it was used as a defoliant.
“It’s killing soldiers at a much higher rate than Agent Orange did in the Vietnam Era,” Rosie Torres, founder of Burn Pits 360, an advocacy group for service members who have fallen ill, told FoxNews.com. “Soldiers from that war were seen dying in their 50’s, 60’s or 70’s. Now with the soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, we are seeing them die in their early 20’s, 30’s, and 40’s.”
Torres, whose husband, LeRoy Torres, fell ill almost immediately after his return from Iraq in 2008, said nearly 64,000 active service members and retirees have put their names on the Burn Pit Registry created by the Department of Veterans Affairs.
But documenting their plight doesn't guarantee coverage.
“I haven’t got diddly squat," Diaz tells Foxnews.com. “The VA is refusing to admit that my cancers are service-related. It’s frustrating. I have $100,000 in medical bills because I have no coverage.
“It’s breaking my family," he said. "I’m just trying to fight to stay alive long enough get my claim settled so my family has something when I am gone.”
Once dead, servicemembers cannot retroactively be placed on the list, which advocates say leaves family members of the fallen in the lurch and often bankrupt.
“It’s a failed registry. It doesn’t work. It could take 20-30 years for someone to get assistance,” Joseph Hickman, author of the 2016 book “The Burn Pits: the Poisoning of America’s Soldiers,” told Foxnews.com. “It’s not fair. They need help now.”
The pits burned more than 1,000 different chemical compounds day and night, and most service members breathed in toxic fumes with no protection, said Hickman, who added the Agent Orange comparison is apt.
“The Department of Defense won’t admit that this is occurring and the VA does not do enough to assist service members because they are waiting on info from the DoD,” he said.
Requests for comment from the Department of Defense were not immediately returned.
Not every case of cancer involving a service member can be blamed on burn pit exposure, but for families who have watched healthy loved ones succumb to terminal illness within months or a few years of returning home, the connection seems clear.
"It’s hard to believe that my husband did not get cancer from this," Christie Badstibner, whose husband Brian, a 14-year Air Force veteran who died two months ago, told FoxNews.com. “How can they deny that the pits had something to do with this? No one wants to take the blame.”
Badstibner, 36, says that because her husband was still on active duty when he returned, their family had health coverage and benefits. But she knows many other families who have suffered the same loss as hers, and been left with no coverage.
“There are a lot of families going through the same thing without any sort of coverage," she said. "There are widows like me, raising their kids on their own. It sucks.”
Now many have died, and more are gravely ill. Those battling a grim menu of cancers, as well as their loved ones and advocates, trace their condition to breathing in the toxic fumes they say could be the most recent wars' version of Agent Orange or Gulf War Illness.
“The clouds of smoke would just hang throughout the base,” Army Sgt. Daniel Diaz, who was stationed at Joint Base Balad, in Iraq's Sunni Triangle from 2004-2005, told FoxNews.com. “No one ever gave it any thought. You are just so focused on the mission at hand. In my mind, I was just getting ready for the fight.”
Diaz returned from duty in 2008. A year later, he started developing health problems including cancer, chronic fatigue and weakness, neuropathy and hypothyroidism. Nearly every base he was stationed at during his four tours in Iraq and Afghanistan had burn pits nearby - and pungent smoke everywhere.
“It’s breaking my family. I’m just trying to fight to stay alive long enough get my claim settled so my family has something when I am gone.”“When I was stationed at Camp Wright, there was one 20-30 feet from our rooms,” he says. “No one ever questioned whether it was dangerous having it so close. Not even once.”
- Sgt. Daniel Diaz
During the wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan, the burn pit method was adopted originally as a temporary measure to get rid of waste and garbage generated on bases. Everything was incinerated in the pits, say soldiers, including plastics, batteries, appliances, medicine, dead animals and even human waste. The items were often set ablaze with jet fuel as the accelerant.
Joint Base Balad, where Diaz was partially stationed, burned up to 147 tons of waste per day as recently as the summer of 2008, according to The Army Times.
The incineration of the waste generated numerous pollutants including carbon monoxide and dioxide—the same chemical compound found in Agent Orange, which left many Vietnam vets sick after it was used as a defoliant.
“It’s killing soldiers at a much higher rate than Agent Orange did in the Vietnam Era,” Rosie Torres, founder of Burn Pits 360, an advocacy group for service members who have fallen ill, told FoxNews.com. “Soldiers from that war were seen dying in their 50’s, 60’s or 70’s. Now with the soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, we are seeing them die in their early 20’s, 30’s, and 40’s.”
Related Image
Sgt. Daniel Diaz was stationed near burn pits at Joint Base Balad in Iraq and now is bed ridden from multiple illnesses including various forms of aggressive cancer.
But documenting their plight doesn't guarantee coverage.
“I haven’t got diddly squat," Diaz tells Foxnews.com. “The VA is refusing to admit that my cancers are service-related. It’s frustrating. I have $100,000 in medical bills because I have no coverage.
“It’s breaking my family," he said. "I’m just trying to fight to stay alive long enough get my claim settled so my family has something when I am gone.”
Once dead, servicemembers cannot retroactively be placed on the list, which advocates say leaves family members of the fallen in the lurch and often bankrupt.
“It’s a failed registry. It doesn’t work. It could take 20-30 years for someone to get assistance,” Joseph Hickman, author of the 2016 book “The Burn Pits: the Poisoning of America’s Soldiers,” told Foxnews.com. “It’s not fair. They need help now.”
The pits burned more than 1,000 different chemical compounds day and night, and most service members breathed in toxic fumes with no protection, said Hickman, who added the Agent Orange comparison is apt.
Related Image
Christie Badstibner (r.), with husband Brian (l.,inset), a 14-year Air Force veteran who recently died.
Requests for comment from the Department of Defense were not immediately returned.
Not every case of cancer involving a service member can be blamed on burn pit exposure, but for families who have watched healthy loved ones succumb to terminal illness within months or a few years of returning home, the connection seems clear.
"It’s hard to believe that my husband did not get cancer from this," Christie Badstibner, whose husband Brian, a 14-year Air Force veteran who died two months ago, told FoxNews.com. “How can they deny that the pits had something to do with this? No one wants to take the blame.”
Badstibner, 36, says that because her husband was still on active duty when he returned, their family had health coverage and benefits. But she knows many other families who have suffered the same loss as hers, and been left with no coverage.
“There are a lot of families going through the same thing without any sort of coverage," she said. "There are widows like me, raising their kids on their own. It sucks.”
Perry Chiaramonte is a reporter for FoxNews.com. Follow him on Twitter at
e+
Friday, April 08, 2016
THE PANAMA PAPERS PROVE ELITE HYPOCRISY by REMI PIET
About the Author
Remi Piet
Remi Piet is assistant professor of public policy, diplomacy and international political economy at Qatar University.
The Panama Papers leak offer for the first time a clear understanding of how world elites engage in shady financial mechanisms to avoid paying taxes and thus contribute to the financing of their national welfare system and development efforts.
More importantly, the colossal sums mentioned shed doubt on the way those sums were accrued in the first place and the probity of 140 senior officials - many of whom are heads of state - from 50 countries.
What can be considered as the "biggest leak in the history of data journalism" in the words of Edward Snowden, underscores the hypocrisy of many rulers who shamelessly opened offshore entities to protect personal assets while enforcing fiscal burdens on their populace.
From David Cameron - whose father managed during 30 years an offshore holding in Panama as he was leading the fight against a Greek bailout in Brussels - to the family members of seven African head of states.
From Mauricio Macri - elected president of Argentina three months ago on a political platform to fight corruption - to the rulers of some of the most authoritarian regimes in the Middle East and Asia.
All have demonstrated the same blatant cynicism while exempting themselves from the fiscal rules they imposed on their subjects or electorate.
READ MORE: Privilege and the Panama Papers
Similarly, it will be tough for authorities in China to explain why the names of family members of at least eight current or former members of the Communist Party's elite Politburo Standing Committee - including Deng Jiagui, the brother-in-law of President Xi Jinping - can be found in the data leaked. Even if the state apparatus immediately tries to contain the spread of the information in both countries, the magnitude of the scandal will eventually force explanations.
The argument of a foreign plot is hard to defend. First because the Panama Papers implicates and exposes political rivals. If Putin is presented as having hidden his wealth, so is Ukraine's President Petro Porochenko, one of Putin’s most vocal opponents.
The leak implicates Bashar al-Assad through his cousin Rami Makhlouf at the same time as the rulers of several countries who pledged to bring him out of office.
More importantly, the data analysis has been carried out simultaneously by 108 news agencies from 76 countries, all members of the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) which has mainly been known until now for its work denouncing US lobbyists.
The main takeaway from the Panama Papers leak is the confirmation that regardless of geopolitical interest, nationality or political affiliation, our world is plagued by the corruption of our political and economic elites who regularly ask everyday citizens to tighten their belts while they use offshore companies to perpetuate their lavish lifestyle.
In this scenario, whistle blowers and the ICIJ are the only significant counter power shedding light on the abuse of dominant social casts.
In a global society that remains dominated by a flawed nation state system in which rulers can perpetuate the legality of offshore financial schemes, albeit morally contestable, the resistance can only be a transnational popular movement of empowered individual citizens.
Putin will probably use these denunciations to his advantage, on the path to the upcoming presidential elections at the end of the year. His control over domestic media is such that he will portray himself as a rebellious scapegoat and his re-election remains very likely despite the developing economic recession.
On the other hand, reactions in more liberal democracies may jeopardise the political future of senior officials linked to tax evasion in Panama.
Hundreds of protesters in Iceland swarmed the capital Reykjavik calling for the resignation of Prime Minister Sigmundur David Gunnlaugsson.
So far, David Cameron has declined to comment on the involvement of his father in these offshore schemes, but he will have to face heavy fire in Parliament and with media with a certain impact on the end of his time in office.
Over the next couple of weeks, the Panama Papers will offer us a survey of the healthiness of domestic institutions in countries where elites have been compromised. From authoritarian regimes where the news will hardly be debated to vibrant democracies in which heads of state will be held accountable and might eventually have to step down.
Remi Piet is assistant professor of public policy, diplomacy and international political economy at Qatar University.
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy.
More importantly, the colossal sums mentioned shed doubt on the way those sums were accrued in the first place and the probity of 140 senior officials - many of whom are heads of state - from 50 countries.
What can be considered as the "biggest leak in the history of data journalism" in the words of Edward Snowden, underscores the hypocrisy of many rulers who shamelessly opened offshore entities to protect personal assets while enforcing fiscal burdens on their populace.
From David Cameron - whose father managed during 30 years an offshore holding in Panama as he was leading the fight against a Greek bailout in Brussels - to the family members of seven African head of states.
From Mauricio Macri - elected president of Argentina three months ago on a political platform to fight corruption - to the rulers of some of the most authoritarian regimes in the Middle East and Asia.
All have demonstrated the same blatant cynicism while exempting themselves from the fiscal rules they imposed on their subjects or electorate.
Unfair propaganda?
Most will deny any involvement and will claim instead to be the victim of an unfair propaganda from foreign forces to destabilise their country. However, it will be hard for Vladimir Putin to explain how his best friend, a musician, is at the centre of a billion-dollar offshore scheme.READ MORE: Privilege and the Panama Papers
Similarly, it will be tough for authorities in China to explain why the names of family members of at least eight current or former members of the Communist Party's elite Politburo Standing Committee - including Deng Jiagui, the brother-in-law of President Xi Jinping - can be found in the data leaked. Even if the state apparatus immediately tries to contain the spread of the information in both countries, the magnitude of the scandal will eventually force explanations.
| The main takeaway from the Panama Papers leak is the confirmation that regardless of geopolitical interest, nationality or political affiliation, our world is plagued by the corruption of our political and economic elites... |
The leak implicates Bashar al-Assad through his cousin Rami Makhlouf at the same time as the rulers of several countries who pledged to bring him out of office.
More importantly, the data analysis has been carried out simultaneously by 108 news agencies from 76 countries, all members of the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) which has mainly been known until now for its work denouncing US lobbyists.
The main takeaway from the Panama Papers leak is the confirmation that regardless of geopolitical interest, nationality or political affiliation, our world is plagued by the corruption of our political and economic elites who regularly ask everyday citizens to tighten their belts while they use offshore companies to perpetuate their lavish lifestyle.
In this scenario, whistle blowers and the ICIJ are the only significant counter power shedding light on the abuse of dominant social casts.
In a global society that remains dominated by a flawed nation state system in which rulers can perpetuate the legality of offshore financial schemes, albeit morally contestable, the resistance can only be a transnational popular movement of empowered individual citizens.
Corrupt behaviour
The political future of senior officials and head of state whose corrupt behaviour has been revealed in the Panama Papers will vary significantly from one country to the next.Putin will probably use these denunciations to his advantage, on the path to the upcoming presidential elections at the end of the year. His control over domestic media is such that he will portray himself as a rebellious scapegoat and his re-election remains very likely despite the developing economic recession.
 |
| Russian President Vladimir Putin [AP] |
Hundreds of protesters in Iceland swarmed the capital Reykjavik calling for the resignation of Prime Minister Sigmundur David Gunnlaugsson.
So far, David Cameron has declined to comment on the involvement of his father in these offshore schemes, but he will have to face heavy fire in Parliament and with media with a certain impact on the end of his time in office.
Over the next couple of weeks, the Panama Papers will offer us a survey of the healthiness of domestic institutions in countries where elites have been compromised. From authoritarian regimes where the news will hardly be debated to vibrant democracies in which heads of state will be held accountable and might eventually have to step down.
Remi Piet is assistant professor of public policy, diplomacy and international political economy at Qatar University.
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy.
Sunday, April 03, 2016
Friday, April 01, 2016
Friday, March 18, 2016
Monday, February 29, 2016
Tuesday, February 16, 2016
Monday, February 08, 2016
Monday, January 25, 2016
5TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE GREAT ARAB SPRING IN EGYPT.....
Anti-government protesters defied a security crackdown and took to the streets as Egypt marked the fifth anniversary on Monday of the 2011 uprising that toppled long-time ruler Hosni Mubarak.
Egyptians demonstrated against the military-led government in Alexandria's Al-Qaed Ibrahim Square, which was the site of 2011 protests, as well as in Nasr City and Shubra district in the capital, Cairo.
Two Egyptians were shot dead by police in an alleged "exchange of gunfire" in Cairo's October 6 district.
Security forces also used gas bombs to disperse protesters in Cairo's eastern al-Matareya district as well as in Kafr Sheikh.
Residents reported that the build-up of security forces, along with recent crackdowns on activists and arbitrary raids on homes, reflected the government's resolve to prevent marking the anniversary with popular demonstrations similar to those in 2011.
WATCH: Egypt burning - the defining moments of the revolution
In a televised speech on Sunday, Egypt's leader Abdel Fattah el-Sisi argued that his government was continuing the aspirations of the 2011 uprising, in spite of the documented human rights violations under his rule, as well as the worsening economy.
The president's speech came just a day after Sisi, a soldier-turned-politician who claimed office in 2014 following victory in an election considered to be suspect, praised the country's police and vowed a firm response to any threat to the country's "stability".
His nod to the police ran against growing complaints by rights activists that forces have returned to Mubarak-era practices such as torture, random arrests and, more recently, forced disappearances.
Police brutality was among the complaints that drove Egyptians to take part in the 2011 uprising.
Sisi alleged that the 2011 uprising had deviated from its course and was forcibly hijacked for "personal gains and narrow interests", in a thinly veiled attempt to justify the military's ousting of Mohamed Morsi, Egypt's first democratically elected president.
The Muslim Brotherhood - the organisation that Morsi was a member of and the largest social movement in Egypt - has been banned and was declared a "terrorist" group in the aftermath of the 2013 coup.
According to Sisi, the "June 30 revolution" - a reference to the day in 2013 when protests erupted in Cairo against Morsi, culminating in the July 3 coup - corrected the course of the 2011 uprising.
Tale of Egyptian teen held for two years without trial
But with an estimated 40,000 prisoners, including thousands of opposition activists, and a parliament that many say is unable to properly check executive powers, analysts say that Egypt has veered far off the course set by nationwide protests five years ago.
Many say the continued deterioration of the country's economy, the security crisis particularly in the Sinai Peninsula that many blame for the rising threat of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant group, and Sisi's policy to crush any dissent have all contributed to a climate far more repressive than the conditions that sparked the 2011 uprising.
While Sisi remains popular among many Egyptians, he no longer enjoys the reverence that once saw his image - complete with a military beret and sunglasses - on everything from posters to women's underwear in the conservative Muslim nation.
Egyptians demonstrated against the military-led government in Alexandria's Al-Qaed Ibrahim Square, which was the site of 2011 protests, as well as in Nasr City and Shubra district in the capital, Cairo.
Two Egyptians were shot dead by police in an alleged "exchange of gunfire" in Cairo's October 6 district.
Security forces also used gas bombs to disperse protesters in Cairo's eastern al-Matareya district as well as in Kafr Sheikh.
Residents reported that the build-up of security forces, along with recent crackdowns on activists and arbitrary raids on homes, reflected the government's resolve to prevent marking the anniversary with popular demonstrations similar to those in 2011.
WATCH: Egypt burning - the defining moments of the revolution
In a televised speech on Sunday, Egypt's leader Abdel Fattah el-Sisi argued that his government was continuing the aspirations of the 2011 uprising, in spite of the documented human rights violations under his rule, as well as the worsening economy.
The president's speech came just a day after Sisi, a soldier-turned-politician who claimed office in 2014 following victory in an election considered to be suspect, praised the country's police and vowed a firm response to any threat to the country's "stability".
His nod to the police ran against growing complaints by rights activists that forces have returned to Mubarak-era practices such as torture, random arrests and, more recently, forced disappearances.
Police brutality was among the complaints that drove Egyptians to take part in the 2011 uprising.
 |
The Muslim Brotherhood - the organisation that Morsi was a member of and the largest social movement in Egypt - has been banned and was declared a "terrorist" group in the aftermath of the 2013 coup.
According to Sisi, the "June 30 revolution" - a reference to the day in 2013 when protests erupted in Cairo against Morsi, culminating in the July 3 coup - corrected the course of the 2011 uprising.
Tale of Egyptian teen held for two years without trial
But with an estimated 40,000 prisoners, including thousands of opposition activists, and a parliament that many say is unable to properly check executive powers, analysts say that Egypt has veered far off the course set by nationwide protests five years ago.
Many say the continued deterioration of the country's economy, the security crisis particularly in the Sinai Peninsula that many blame for the rising threat of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant group, and Sisi's policy to crush any dissent have all contributed to a climate far more repressive than the conditions that sparked the 2011 uprising.
While Sisi remains popular among many Egyptians, he no longer enjoys the reverence that once saw his image - complete with a military beret and sunglasses - on everything from posters to women's underwear in the conservative Muslim nation.
Friday, January 15, 2016
Wednesday, January 13, 2016
Methodist Church blacklists 5 Israeli banks
The pension fund for the United Methodist Church has blocked five Israeli banks from its investment portfolio in what it describes as a broad review meant to weed out companies that profit from abuse of human rights.
The fund, called the General Board of Pension and Health Benefits, excluded Bank Hapoalim, Bank Leumi, First International Bank of Israel, Israel Discount Bank, and Mizrahi Tefahot Bank, according to the pension board's website.
The Israeli bank stock the board sold off was worth a few million dollars in a fund with $20 billion in assets. The fund also sold holdings worth about $5,000 in the Israeli real estate and construction company Shikun & Binui, and barred the company from the pension group's investment portfolio.
The pension board identified Israel and the Palestinian territories among more than a dozen "high risk" countries or regions with "a prolonged and systematic pattern of human rights abuses." Other countries on the list include Saudi Arabia, the Central African Republic and North Korea.
A spokesman for Israel's foreign ministry declined to comment.
The Methodist church has about 13 million members worldwide and is the largest mainline Protestant group in the United States.
The pension board had initiated the review in 2014 with a focus on protecting human rights and easing climate change. A total of 39 companies around the world were excluded from the fund's investments over human rights concerns and nine more were blocked over worries about their alleged contribution to global warming. The fund remains invested in 18 Israeli companies, according to board spokeswoman Colette Nies.
The banks had been among several companies targeted by United Methodist Kairos Response, a coalition of church members who advocate for divestment from companies with business in the Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories.
"This is the first step toward an effort that helps send a clear message that we as a church are listening and that we are concerned about human rights violations," Susanne Hoder, a leader of United Methodist Kairos Response, said Tuesday. "We hope it will also be encouraging to people in the Jewish community who are working for justice."
A competing group, United Methodists for Constructive Peacemaking in Israel and Palestine, said in a statement that the pension board action should not be viewed as divestment from Israel, since the top Methodist legislative body rejected proposals in 2012 to divest from companies that produce equipment used by Israel in the territories. The same body, called General Conference, passed a resolution denouncing the Israeli occupation and expanding illegal Jewish settlements in the territories.
The pension board's decision came at a time when divestment is gaining momentum among liberal Protestants as a tool to pressure Israel over its policies toward Palestinians. Last year, the United Church of Christ voted to divest from companies with business in the Israeli-occupied territories. The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) took a similar vote in 2014.
The next Methodist General Conference is scheduled for this May.
The fund, called the General Board of Pension and Health Benefits, excluded Bank Hapoalim, Bank Leumi, First International Bank of Israel, Israel Discount Bank, and Mizrahi Tefahot Bank, according to the pension board's website.
The Israeli bank stock the board sold off was worth a few million dollars in a fund with $20 billion in assets. The fund also sold holdings worth about $5,000 in the Israeli real estate and construction company Shikun & Binui, and barred the company from the pension group's investment portfolio.
The pension board identified Israel and the Palestinian territories among more than a dozen "high risk" countries or regions with "a prolonged and systematic pattern of human rights abuses." Other countries on the list include Saudi Arabia, the Central African Republic and North Korea.
A spokesman for Israel's foreign ministry declined to comment.
The Methodist church has about 13 million members worldwide and is the largest mainline Protestant group in the United States.
The pension board had initiated the review in 2014 with a focus on protecting human rights and easing climate change. A total of 39 companies around the world were excluded from the fund's investments over human rights concerns and nine more were blocked over worries about their alleged contribution to global warming. The fund remains invested in 18 Israeli companies, according to board spokeswoman Colette Nies.
The banks had been among several companies targeted by United Methodist Kairos Response, a coalition of church members who advocate for divestment from companies with business in the Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories.
"This is the first step toward an effort that helps send a clear message that we as a church are listening and that we are concerned about human rights violations," Susanne Hoder, a leader of United Methodist Kairos Response, said Tuesday. "We hope it will also be encouraging to people in the Jewish community who are working for justice."
A competing group, United Methodists for Constructive Peacemaking in Israel and Palestine, said in a statement that the pension board action should not be viewed as divestment from Israel, since the top Methodist legislative body rejected proposals in 2012 to divest from companies that produce equipment used by Israel in the territories. The same body, called General Conference, passed a resolution denouncing the Israeli occupation and expanding illegal Jewish settlements in the territories.
The pension board's decision came at a time when divestment is gaining momentum among liberal Protestants as a tool to pressure Israel over its policies toward Palestinians. Last year, the United Church of Christ voted to divest from companies with business in the Israeli-occupied territories. The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) took a similar vote in 2014.
The next Methodist General Conference is scheduled for this May.
Wednesday, January 06, 2016
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)