Лев Гунин - ГУЛаг Палестины

Non-Existent Photo of Shulamit Aloni", by Roman Polonsky. An Interview With Shulamit Aloni. "WIESTI". December 29, 1994. Tel-Aviv.

4."Ottawa Vows Crackdown On Phony Refugees", by Yvonne Zacharias. "THE GAZETTE", September 7, 1996.

To Support Our Declaration We Are Also Listing Or Submitting You Next Documents:

1)"LE MOND DIPLOMATIQUE". Issue #1, January, 1997. The declaration of Amnesty International about the decision of Israeli government to legalize

tortures by Mossad and Shabbak over the detainees.

2) Jews refer to non-Jewish women officially as nothing more than 'unclean meat' - shiska. This observation was cited coming from Jew, Professor Israel

Shahak in his book _Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of 3,000 years_[Published by Pluto Press (London 1994)].

3) Hassidic Jews in New York yeshivas are among the top money launderers in the world. They use the cloak of religion to hide their work and they use

Israel's exclusively Jewish immigration policy (the "law of return") to escape U.S. justice by relocating to Israel. New York's 47th Street : Maariv, September

2, 1994 By Ben Kaspit, the New York correspondent

4) American Civil Rights Review http://webusers.anet-stl.com/~civil/index.html

5) Multicultural Disasters http://webusers.anet-stl.com/~civil/dv0.html HUD Disaster Tours of Ruined Urban Areas HUD Has Destroyed

http://webusers.anet-stl.com/~civil/stlouistour.html Immigration Debacle! http://webusers.anet-stl.com/~civil/imfolder.html

6)"Orthodox Again Battle Police in Jerusalem", by Douglas Jehl for "NEW YORK TIMES". In "THE GAZETTE". July 21, 1996.

7)Efraim Sevela. "Stop The Airplane, I Have To Get Out..." A documentary, autobiography novel. "STAV". Jerusalem, 1980. (In Russian).

8) http://www.igc.org/Womensnet/dworkin/IsraelI.html

9) http://talk.excite.com/[email protected]^[email protected]/86

10) http://www.colba.net/~leog/newspaper/araven.html

11)"By Way of Deception", by Victor Ostrovsky. St.Martin's Press. New York.1990.

12)Grigory Swirsky. "The Breakthrough". New York. (In Russian).

13)"The Bungling Bank Robbers of Israel", by Doug Struck. "THE GAZETTE". August 5,1995.

14)"Dream Homes But No Buyers", by Raine Marcus. "CITY LIGHTS", a supplement to "Jerusalem Post", September 11, 1992.

SUPPLEMENT WE SUBMIT OR ARE PLANNING TO SUBMIT COPIES OF THAT APPEAL TO: 1.UN Human Right Committee in Ottawa.

2.Amnesty International, London. 3.Amnesty International Division for Refugees. 4.Canadian Ministry of Immigration. 5.The Office of Prime Minister of

Quebec. 6."LA PRESSE" 7."THE GAZETTE". 8."HOUR" 9."MAIL AND GLOBE" 10."LE MONDE DIPLOMATIQUE" 11."WASHINGTON POST"

12."CHICAGO TRIBUNE" 13."BERLINER ZEITUNG" 14."ZYCIE WARSZAWY" 15."TIMES" 16."THE GUARDIAN" 17."DOUBLE

STANDARDS" (AN INTERNET ON-LINE EDITION) 18. "EXCITE TALKS" (INTERNET) TO OTHER PLACES AND ORGANIZATIONS

FROM FAMILY METELNITSKY. MONTREAL, Desember, 1996.

To Amnesty International's London Office

Why WeTurn To Amnesty International?

1) Because our complains to Amnesty International from Israel played if not the main,a very important role during all the 2 immigration hearings in our case.

2) Because indirectly or even directly (from a particular point of view) they insinuated that we must be punished for our contacts with Amnesty International.

3) Because what happened during our immigration hearing here in Montreal (Quebec, Canada) is so incredible and horrible that will encourage human right

violations everywhere on a wider scale. 4) Because during the hearing the immigration officer falsificated Amnesty International's (and other human rights

organizations') documents and lied about them. 6) Because if a family comes to a country (which accepts refugees under the Geneva Convention act) but

faces abuses, ungrounded accusations, threats, hatred and injustice within an immigration court room - that means a mayhem for the human rights, placing the

very basis of human rights in jeopardy. 7) Because we are absolutely certain (and we have presented undenieble evidences to the immigration bord) that we

are going to be beatten, abused or even killed if we will be turned back to Israel.

We came to Israel in 1990 ; as many other people we had a hope for a better life. As the most of Russian-speaking people we were "welcomed" by a

malicious anger, the state unti-Russian propaganda and the most severe discrimination. Our son was 15 when we came to Israel. Each of us (including our

son) was assaulted, abused, beaten, discriminated against.The ignorance of what is going on in Israel with the Russian-speaking people can not make what

we and our friends suffered from in Israel unreal. Batteries, assaults, abuses were real and happened to us in real life. If my son could come to school and

could hear a discussion about the last article in a Hebrew newspaper, in which "Russians" were called sons of a bitch, prostitutes, fools and thieves: was it

"unreal"? And the computer games in Hebrew accompanied by songs with words like "Russians, go home":They were as real as the real life. And the social

climate in Israel is so horrible that if a child is beaten at school "because he's Russian" - he is forced to feel guilty himself as if he's guilty in not being an Israeli

but being a Russian.

Any person with conciseness (a journalist, an immigration official, a human right organization official) could take a translator from Hebrew, go to a library or

to an archive and find articles in Hebrew newspapers which have highly aggressive untie-Russian contest. And what about thousands of articles in Russian

newspapers published in Israel about what can be called almost a genocide against "Russians"?

When they began to call my son to a draft board (because Israel has a compulsory military service) he asked an alternative military service each time they

called him: because he was afraid of hostility towards "Russians" within the Israeli army and also because of the rule that a single son can not be taken into the

front-line units against his will. They gave him no decision, but kept ordering him to came to the draft point again and again. One day a new routine order to

come to the draft point arrived. My son was ordered to come one day but the order have been sent one day later then the date of his appearance. A couple

of other days past before he got the order. But as soon as he got it he immediately went to the draft board.

When he came they have arrested him incriminating him a disobedience to the order to come. No excuse, no explanation were admitted. Everything

happened so fast that there is no doubt: they were prepared. So, they have submitted this order for him later then the date he was called to intentionally. He

was accused in a refusal to come to the draft board (the ignored his voluntarial arrival) and in avoiding the military service. They have treated him like if he

already was a soldier and flied from a military unit. He was also given a soldier's number as if he was a soldier when in reality he never entered the army and

never wearied a military uniform. When he admitted that he's going to become mentally ill because of the military prison they refused to give him a

Russian-speaking psychologist, and the Hebrew- speaking psychologist couldn't speak with our son, but wrote a report based on ungrounded insinuations.

When later a Russian-speaking psychologist appeared he translated him that report but told that it is impossible now to dispute what the Israeli wrote.

When our son was in the military prison severe humiliations were committed over him. All the violations of the rules and of the moral norms in his case were

too innumerable to mention them. During his imprisonment our son was transformed from a healthy person to a mentally ill boy. When he was released from

the military prison (he was in the prison more then 3 months; no charges were posed against him, no court took place) the military medical committee

recognized him as a mentally ill person. When he was just imprisoned he was recognized as a fully healthy person suitable to the military service.He received

some treatment here, in Canada, and the immigration board know it. We did everything we could to release our son from the military prison. But the civil

lawyers refused to take his case as soon as they heard about the conflict with the army. Some of them assaulted us refusing to take the case.We demanded a

military lawyer but the military commandature in Jaffo denied us a military lawyer. We turned to all the possible places like Israel Bar Association, human

rights organizations, Sharansky's Zionist Forum, Israel and foreign media, state officials: nobody couldn't or didn't want to help us. Then we decided to send

a letter to Amnesty International. A friend of us - a dissident and a journalist Lev G. - has contacted Amnesty International and later submitted several faxes

to them. When the authorities realized that we complained to Amnesty International they released our son from the military prison.

We couldn't live in Israel any more after what happened to us and to our son there, and also because we were afraid that our son can be arrested again if we

will stay in Israel. The only reasonable solution for us was to escape. And the only way to do it was to become refugee claimants. We flied to Montreal in

November, 1994.

We have submitted all the documentary proof we had to support our claim to the immigration board (committee). We also sincerely described what

happened to us in our claim's atory without any distortion or exaggeration. But what happened to us in the immigration courtroom and between and after our

2 hearings is just incredible...

Why We Think Our Human Rights Were Violated By the Court?

Inside The Courtroom:

1)Some of the main documentary proofs (statements, affidavits, letters, receipts, articles, ect.) were ignored as if they never existed. 2)Other extremely

important documents were mentioned but were ignored (if not - they might be an obstacle to what the judges incriminated us). 3) Other documents (including

Amnesty International's confirmation of our complain) were mentioned as incomplete proof of particular events, when in reality they were given to support

other events. In the same time documents which relate to these events were ignored. 4) The same way our words were ignored, too. For example, I was

asked an insinuating question. My answer closed that question by a clear and unbeatable conterargument. So, what then? Then the same insinuation was

repeated - but this time in an affirmative form: As if I said nothing. The same question could be given 2, 3, 5 times non-stop. If I gave the same answer again

and again they shouted on me, used threats, aggression, incredible accusations to force me to change my answer. It's clear that such a method violates moral

and legal norms - and any hesitation by a refugee claimant under such an illegal psychological pressure can not be taken into consideration. 5) Too often they

questioned us giving us no rights to response. They shuted us down replacing our eventual answer by their own - and later based their conclusions not on our

answers but on their own statement posing it as our - not their words. 6) It was repeated again and again that they doubt about our rights to appeal (for a

refugee status) because our actions (when we were in Israel) weren't a good solution. As examples of "good solutions" were mentioned: A demolition of our

family, a criminal offense - and so on! 7) Several times the bord members expressed their dissaproval by the norms of democracy or by my aproval of the

democracy laws. It is absolutely clear that our case was treated not according to Canadians laws but according to the rules and norms of Israel since - in the

judges' eyes - we belong not to Canadien but to Israeli jurisdiction. This position - neither being ordered to the bord or being the product of the board itself

made the courtroom a part of Israel's territory. 8)The procedure of our immigration hearing wasn't an investigation in our case but a pure pro-Israel's

propaganda. It's goal wasn't to detect whether or not our claim for refugee status is justified but to defend the image of Israel as a "good" country in an

imprudent and abusing form. The depersonalization of our claim was done in an extreme form ignoring our personal history. So the only criteria chosen to

support the bord's point of view was the very fact that we came from Israel. But the only admissible attitude to refugees is to base the decision on what

happened to them personally, not on which country they flied. 9)The members of the board expressed their detestation of the human rights defense and

verbally denied (directly or indirectly) a number of recognized human rights. 10)Sending requests to Israeli embassy and demanding some definite information

about us, the immigration officer violated another moral and judicial principle: Not to announce his claim to the government of a country a refugee claimant

escaped from. 11)Reading Amnesty International's and other reports the immigration officer distorted and sometimes falsified the documents. 12) Documents

submitted by the Israeli government, by it's dependents or by it's embassy were considered as absolutely reliable and were voluntarily represented by the

tribunal as non-debatable. In the same time documents that were represented by our lawyer (or our documents) - newspapers, statements, declarations, and

so on - weren't treated as equal to Israeli propaganda papers. More then that: At least our documents were completely ignored: As if they never existed. In

the same time the documentation presented by Israeli government can't be treated as an arbitrary source: Because Israel is involved. Meanwhile a number of

our documents may be considered as more objective and independent. 13) The immigration officer used 1) an open lie 2) threats 3) desinformation; 4)

expressed an unexplained malicious anger towards us; 5) claimed one thing to defend her position during our hearing and claimed the contrary during the

hearing in G. family case (our cases are related, and G. was called as a witness to our second hearing); 6) she lied about what I said, about what she

previously said , about what was said about the situation in Israel and so on; 7) her behavier towards us and G. family was so incredibly agressive as if she

had a personal reason to punish us, or to exterminate us. 14) A 'yes" or "no" answer was demanded in situations when it was clear that such an answer is

absolutely impossible. Demanding "yes" or "no" answer only they justified their decision not let us speak. 15) Despite our son's mental illness and the

evidence that he can not be asked the immigration officer asked him various questions in an aggressive manner. We understood that questions which she