You are here
jerusalemites (267)
Children categories
Posted on: 12/11/2012
By Adri Nieuwhof
Israel has held six Palestinian boys from Nablus in solitary confinement in al-Jalame detention center near Haifa, writes Defence for Children International-Palestine Section in an urgent appeal.
The boys have spent on average 14.5 days in solitary confinement, ranging from four to 29 days. Following their detention in al-Jalame, the boys were transferred to Megiddo prison. The transfer into Israel and subsequent detention of the boys violates the Fourth Geneva Convention Articles 49 and 76.
British-Danish security giant G4S has provided security equipment to both al-Jalame and Megiddo prisons, according to a March 2011 report on the firm by Who Profits.
Solitary confinement cells in al-Jalame
Since 2008, Defence for Children International-Palestine Section (DCI) has documented 59 casesof children who report being held in solitary confinement in detention facilities in Israel, including six boys during the past five months. Interrogators used threats of prolonged solitary confinement to extract confessions.
The six boys were locked up in different cells. Their description of the cell follows below. The full story of the arrest and detention of the boys can be read by clicking on the name of each boy.
Seventeen-year-old Suleiman spent 18 days in solitary confinement, mainly Cell 36: “It is very small and has no windows. The lights were on non-stop.”
Sixteen-year-old Jamal was held for four days in solitary confinement in Cell 19. The cell had no windows and the light was left on 24 hours per day. The interrogator threatened to keep him in solitary confinement for a long time if he did not confess. “I actually believed him when he said this. My body started shaking and I felt really dizzy,” recalled Jamal. “I begged him not to put me back in the cell and I confessed to throwing stones, Molotov cocktails and grenades at military jeeps, even though I never did it.”
Seventeen-year-old Adham was held for 12 days in solitary confinement in Cell 36: “It is very small and only has room for one mattress. The mattress was very dirty. The toilet had a horrible smell and there were two holes in the ceiling that allowed freezing cold air in. The lights were dim yellow and left on the whole time. I spent 12 days in this cell. I could not tell day from night. I could not tell what time it was. I did not even see the prison guard who brought me food and passed it through a gap in the door. I did not sleep at all on the first night because I was so scared.”
Sixteen-year-old Abdullah was held for six days in solitary confinement in Cell 36: “It’s a very small cell with a mattress on the floor. There is a toilet with an awful smell, no windows and a very cold air conditioner. The lights are always on and hurt my eyes.”
Sixteen-year-old Mujahed said he was held for 29 days in solitary confinement during the 52 days detention period in al-Jalame. He was held in a number of different cells, but “all the cells looked the same but some were bigger than others. They all lacked windows. The lights were turned on the whole time. Also the toilets had a horrible smell.”
Seventeen-year-old Murad was held for 19 days in solitary confinement in three different cells. Detention Cell 1 “is miserable. It has no windows. There is a yellow dim light that is kept on all the time and hurts the eyes. I confessed on day one because I was very scared they might keep me in the cell for a long time. Cell 36 is similar to Cell 1, but is smaller and barely large enough for one person. I never saw anyone except the interrogator. The prison guard who took me to the interrogation room and back made me wear blacked-out glasses so I could not see anything. I could not tell day from night. I was in really bad shape.”
Solitary confinement inflicts mental damage
Solitary confinement inflicts severe mental damage upon prisoners, rights organizationsAddameer and Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) wrote in a 2008 report. The report looked into the effect of solitary confinement on adults.
“Sleep disturbances, through depression and anxiety, to psychotic reactions, such as visual and auditory hallucinations, paranoid states, disorientation with regards to time and space, states of acute confusion, and thought disorders,” are mentioned as effects.
The Israeli Prison Service (IPS) confirmed the negative impact of solitary confinement in a 16 April 1996 report. The following quote from the IPS report is mentioned in Addameer and PHR’s report:
Research findings on the issue are unequivocal and show that imprisonment in isolation causes deep psychotic reactions. Clearly the duration of time a prisoner is held in solitary confinement has direct implications on its side effects, as holding an individual alone in a cell for one day is not the same as isolating him, as stated, for a period of three weeks, months, or years. There is no doubt that there exists a certain time limit after which most people will feel that solitary confinement is intolerable and will suffer, as a result, from long-term effects.
Addameer and PHR stress that there is no fixed time period after which mental problems will arise, because it will differ from one individual to another.
Solitary confinement is harmful for children
The potential damage to young people held in solitary confinement is much greater than to adults. In the report Growing Up Locked Down of 4 October, Human Rights Watch researched the practice of solitary confinement of youth in the US. The practice harms young people in ways that are different, and more profound, than if they were adults, says the report.
Experts assert that young people are psychologically unable to handle solitary confinement with the resilience of an adult. And, because they are still developing, traumatic experiences like solitary confinement may have a profound effect on their chance to rehabilitate and grow. Solitary confinement can exacerbate, or make more likely, short and long-term mental health problems. The most common deprivation that accompanies solitary confinement, denial of physical exercise, is physically harmful to adolescents’ health and well-being.
Children should not be held in solitary confinement
Richard Falk, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the West Bank and Gaza, condemned Israel’s use of solitary confinement against Palestinian children in a 20 July 2012 press statement.
“Prison conditions are often deplorable, requiring children to sleep on the floor or on a concrete bed in a windowless cell,” said Falk. Israel’s use of solitary confinement against children “is inhumane, cruel, degrading, and unlawful, and, most worryingly, it is likely to adversely affect the mental and physical health of underage detainees.”
The UN Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Juan E. Méndez shares Falk’s view.
Solitary confinement should be banned as a punishment or extortion technique, Méndez told the UN General Assembly on 18 October 2011. The Israeli solitary confinement cells are “often lit with fluorescent bulbs as their only source of light, and they have no source of fresh air,” wrote Méndez in aninterim report.
He recommended solitary confinements for children be abolished: “it can amount to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment when used as a punishment, during pretrial detention, indefinitely or for a prolonged period, for persons with mental disabilities or juveniles.”
Update
On 12 January 2013, Defence for Children International-Palestine section has submitted complaints to the Israeli authorities on behalf of five children who were ill- treated and tortured when they were held in G4S equipped al-Jalame interrogation center. The complaints request that an investigation be opened into allegations that the children were mistreated by the Israeli Prison Service and the Israeli Security Agency during their detention in the al-Jalame interrogation center. Click here to read more.
Source:
http://electronicintifada.net
Posted on: 12 June 2005
By Defence for Children International-Palestine Section
In the occupied Palestinian territories (OPT), a collaborator is understood as any Palestinian who cooperates with the Israeli security forces in the OPT or in Israel. Recruiting Palestinians as collaborators is perceived in the OPT as part of Israel’s policy to maintain control over the territory and the Palestinian people.
The Israeli intelligence services (Shabak) continually seek to recruit children as informants.
Most cases of collaboration are found in interrogation centers and prisons where detainees are put under extreme physical and mental pressure to collaborate. Palestinian children often find themselves under such pressure.1
The Israeli intelligence services (Shabak) continually seek to recruit children as informants. A field survey with former child detainees conducted in 2003 by DCI–PS, estimated that 60 per cent of the children interviewed, some of them are as young as 12, were reported to have been tortured or subjected to other forms of coercion or inducement in an attempt to make them cooperate. By late 2003 in Gaza alone there were on average 40 attempts to recruit minors every month.2
Children accused of being recruited as informants by the Israeli authorities are at risk of stigmatization, exclusion, and on occasion, retaliation. On 5 February 2002, shortly after death sentences were passed on two 17 year olds, Khaled Kamiel and Jihad Kamiel, by the Palestinian State Security Court in Jenin for the killing of a member of the Palestinian Authority security services, armed men entered the court and shot dead both boys. They had been accused of collaborating with the Israeli authorities.3
There is a growing need to prevent the use of Palestinian children as collaborators and to protect children who have allegedly been used as collaborators by the Israeli forces. Palestinian Authorities and community and religious leaders, schools, families and Palestinian and international non governmental organizations (NGOs) all have a key role to play in this prevention and protection task.
Approximately 2,800 children were arrested by the Israeli authorities between September 2000 and July 2004. At various moments, Palestinian children constituted 10 per cent of all Palestinian detainees. In 2002, one-fifth of child prisoner cases handled by DCI–PS involved children aged 13 and 14; the rest were between 15 and 17 years old.
n an interview with DCI–PS, a legal counselor of the PSF said: “The Israeli Shabak is targeting young children because they are easy preys. This month we arrested six collaborators, three of whom were under the age of 18. It is estimated that out of every ten (alleged) collaborators that we arrest and investigate, four are children. The youngest we encountered was 12.”
The exact number of collaborators, adults and children, is unknown, but in a DCI–PS field survey on 40 former child prisoners, 25 children reported that they were asked or pressured to collaborate with the Israeli occupying force. According to the alleged victims, a variety of methods were used, including beatings, threatening with long sentences, repercussions against the family, sexual assault, and public shaming. Rewards offered for cooperation included early release, money, work- or other permits, and sexual services. Most of the children interviewed by DCI–PSwere “approached” by the Shabak. The Israeli police attempted to recruit two children, two other children were pressured by Palestinian collaborators inside the prison, and, in an isolated case, an Israeli soldier attempted to recruit a child.
DCI–PS has collected testimonies of children who regretted that they gave in to the pressure to become informers. It is extremely difficult for Palestinian children to denounce attempts to make them collaborate since they are expected to report to their Israeli “superiors” or otherwise face serious consequences. The Palestinian society also has little mercy with collaborators, especially when they are connected to serious incidents leading to the death of other Palestinians or damage to the national cause.
Source:
http://electronicintifada.net
Posted on:
By Steven Erlanger
AL ZAYYEM, West Bank — They buried Rabi al-Essawy 14 months ago on land his family owns not far from this village, between East Jerusalem and the large Israeli settlement of Maale Adumim. Mr. Essawy, 65, was a member of an important clan, and thousands attended his funeral.
Khaled al-Saidi, right, said his family bought land in E1, between East Jerusalem and Maale Adumim, in the 1990s. The Israelis have told him to leave. Credit Rina Castelnuovo for The New York Times
But Mr. Essawy’s grave is in a parcel of land known as E1, a largely empty patch of the West Bank that is among the most sensitive pieces of real estate in an intractable conflict that is fundamentally about the land. The Israelis mean to annex E1 — short for East 1 — and they do not want Muslim graves to complicate future plans to build more settlements here.
Israeli authorities have ordered the family to remove Mr. Essawy’s remains and bury him in the village cemetery, just outside E1.
The fight over Mr. Essawy’s grave is a tiny skirmish in the long, intensifying battle over this parcel of land, a fight that speaks to the seemingly insurmountable differences, hostility and distrust between the Israelis and thePalestinians. It also stands as a symbol of the failure of negotiations as each side tries to outmaneuver the other with unilateral actions, and the international community is left on the sidelines to do little more than express discontent.
“It’s a big deal because for both sides, it looks like it’s in the heart of their dreams,” the columnist Nahum Barnea wrote in the newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth. “Nobody’s innocent here. Everybody’s trying to force his will on the other side.”
Israel sees E1, only 4.6 square miles and largely rocky desert, as the stone in the arch that connects East Jerusalem, which Israel has annexed, to Maale Adumim, one of the biggest of the so-called settlement blocs, with a population of 40,000. Israel says it intends to keep Maale Adumim in any peace settlement, hoping to swap land with any future Palestinian state. In fact, it was Yitzhak Rabin of the Labor Party who in 1994 attached E1 to the municipality of Maale Adumim.
For the Palestinians, E1 is seen as essential if they are ever to achieve a viable independent state with East Jerusalem as their capital. Palestinians say they need the land to preserve a workable, practical connection between East Jerusalem and the West Bank, and to build housing for Palestinian refugees and their descendants. As important, the Palestinians contend, E1 is central to a crucial north-south route through the West Bank from Ramallah to Bethlehem.
Israeli officials argue that a system of protected roads and tunnels through E1 could allow Palestinians passage. Palestinians say that Israelis could instead use such roads to travel between Maale Adumim and Jerusalem, where many of the settlers work. Israeli officials also argue that the West Bank is not obstructed farther to the east, and that Palestinians can drive north-south closer to the Jordan River; Palestinians say that the Jordan Valley is too far out of their way and that Israel has said it will demand a security presence there in any case.
And of course the Palestinians, like the United States and most other nations, regard all Israeli settlements beyond the 1967 boundaries, including in East Jerusalem itself, as illegal or as “obstacles to peace.” They regard Israeli assertions of “consensus” on keeping three main settlement blocs in the West Bank as self-delusion. Washington, however, does accept the principle of land swaps to accommodate demographic changes on the ground, but always subject to final agreement between the parties.
E1 has been contentious for years, with Washington warning various Israeli governments not to start building there. But E1 burst back into the forefront recently after Mahmoud Abbas, the president of the Palestinian Authority, won United Nations General Assembly approval to recognize Palestine as a nonmember observer state. Mr. Abbas pressed ahead despite warnings from the United States and Israel that such an action would be a unilateral step in violation of the 1993 Oslo Accords that set up the supposedly interim Palestinian Authority.
Mr. Abbas won handily in the General Assembly on Nov. 29, in a 138 to 9 vote. Even Germany, a strong Israeli ally, abstained. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel responded with a three-part riposte. He withheld taxes collected on behalf of the Palestinians to pay down their electricity debt to Israel. He announced final approval for the construction of 3,000 more housing units in East Jerusalem and existing settlement blocs — beyond the 1967 borders, but within current settlement lines. And finally, he accelerated planning for the construction of up to 3,400 housing units inside E1.
The decision set off a critical reaction, especially in Washington and Europe. Many countries called in Israeli ambassadors to complain. But there was confusion, too, with some critics presuming that construction would go ahead in E1.
Israeli officials explained later that any construction in E1, if it happened at all, was many years away, and that the move on E1 was “symbolism against symbolism” — a symbolic response to a symbolic recognition of statehood. But the new planning for E1 is also “a warning to the Palestinians that E1 is now in play if they do further outrageous acts,” one senior official said. “We don’t exclude the possibility that E1 moves from symbolism to something real — the prime minister has raised the stakes and put E1 back on the table.”
Mr. Netanyahu himself told the German newspaper Die Welt that “as far as our future action is concerned, it depends on the Palestinians.” He added: “In any case what we’ve advanced so far is only planning, and we will have to see. We shall act further based on what the Palestinians do. If they don’t act unilaterally, then we won’t have any purpose to do so either.”
But he has also argued that there is a political consensus in Israel that E1 should be used for more Israeli settlement, that previous governments agreed with him, and that the Labor Party, under Mr. Rabin, authorized E1.
E1 is also not the only contested plan. On Monday, a planning committee gave final approval to build 1,500 units in the East Jerusalem settlement neighborhood of Ramat Shlomo — the development that was announced as Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. visited Jerusalem in 2010.
For now, the only significant Israeli construction in E1, which is largely state land, is a regional police station. Built in 2008 high on a hill, it overlooks the village cemetery where Yusra al-Qaisi, believed to be 75, was buried last week.
Khaled al-Saidi, 33, was among the mourners. He is a Bedouin whose family has lived on this land, he said, for more than 80 years; more important, and unlike most of the Bedouins here, his family bought the land in the 1990s. Still, he has been told by the Israelis to move; the house of his brother, Ali, has already been destroyed, because it was supposedly in the path of a future security zone.
“Here I’m on the edge of the security zone and there I’m also in the way of your settlement,” he said. “Where do I go? I just want a place for my sheep to go.”
On the opposite hill, near the police station, the authorities of Maale Adumim set up a Hanukkahmenorah, their efforts to light a candle defeated by the wind. But the mayor of the settlement, Benny Kashriel, said that he believes that after 18 years of delay and hesitation, the Israeli government might finally be ready to authorize construction in E1.
Source:
http://www.nytimes.com
Posted on: December 2012
By Harriet Sherwood
Despite its prosaic name, E1 has the potential to kill off hopes for a viable Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital, according to opponents of Israeli development on the 12 sq km site .
Israeli officials say construction on E1 is the logical and necessary expansion of Maale Adumim, a vast settlement east of the pre-1967 Green Line, to meet demand for homes close to the city that Israel claims is its indivisible capital. Plans to develop the land have been in existence for almost 14 years, but they have been kept on hold largely due to pressure from Washington.
Mostly stretching towards Jericho, E1 is home to a number of Bedouin communities and their livestock, plus a huge Israeli police headquarters perched strategically on a hill. A network of roads has been constructed, but it is closed to civilian traffic.
Implementation of the E1 development plan, approved in 1999, would largely complete a crescent of Jewish settlements around the east of Jerusalem, separating it from Palestinian towns and cities in the West Bank. It would also almost bisect the West Bank, making a contiguous Palestinian state almost impossible.
According to the Israeli human rights organisation B’tselem, implementation of the E1 plan will have “far-reaching consequences and will interrupt the contiguity of the southern and northern West Bank”.
It added: “The construction in E1 will further increase the forced isolation between the West Bank and East Jerusalem. It will enclose East Jerusalem from the east, connect to the Israeli neighbourhoods built north of Jerusalem’s Old City, and create a physical and functional barrier between East Jerusalem and the Palestinian population in adjacent West Bank communities for which the city serves as the main metropolitan and religious centre.”
The Israeli authorities have taken steps to implement a plan to forcibly relocate more than 1,000 Bedouin who live and graze their livestock on the stony hills. Demolition orders have been issued for homes, animal pens and a school built from discarded car tyres. Israel says the buildings were constructed without permission, which is almost impossible to obtain.
The original plan entailed moving the Bedouin families to a site close to Jerusalem’s main rubbish dump. Following legal challenges and international pressure, Israel has said it will consult the communities on their relocation.
Israel’s decision to press ahead with the development of E1 in the aftermath of the United Nations general assembly’s recognition of the state of Palestine signals an intention to build, rather than the start of construction, which would be many years away.
Maale Adumim is home to around 40,000 people. Resembling a small city, it has more than 20 schools and 80 kindergartens, 40 synagogues and several shopping malls. The majority of its residents are secular Jews who do not consider themselves settlers but inhabitants of a suburb of Jerusalem. Israel says Maale Adumim and other main settlement blocks close to the Green Line must be on the Israeli side of any future border.
All settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank are illegal under international law.
Source:
http://www.theguardian.com
Posted on: 2 Dec 2012
The E-1 plan and its implications for human rights in the West Bank In late November 2012, the media reported that the Israeli government had issued instructions to promote the planning of thousands of apartments that would constitute an expansion of the Ma’ale Adumim settlement as part of the E-1 plan, in the segment that connect Ma’ale Adumim to Jerusalem. 
According to themedia reports, these instructions were issued following the UN General Assembly’s recognition of Palestine as a state with UN observer status. After the directive was issued, the Civil Administration approved two of the three E-1 residential plans to be filed for objections. In August 2013, the plans had not yet been filed and no progress has been made toward their approval.
The implementation of construction plans in E1 will create an urban bloc between Ma’ale Adumim and Jerusalem, exacerbate the isolation of East Jerusalem from the rest of the West Bank and disrupt the territorial contiguity between the northern and southern parts of the West Bank. The establishment of settlements in occupied territory is a breach of international humanitarian law, which prohibits the transfer of people from the occupying state into the occupied area. It also prohibits any permanent changes in the occupied territory, with the exception of changes mandated by military needs or in order to benefit the local population. In addition, the establishment of Israeli settlements leads to numerous violations of Palestinians’ human rights. In addition, the Civil Administration is planning to expel the Bedouin communities currently residing in this area. If the expulsion goes through, it will be a further breach of international humanitarian law, which prohibits the forcible transfer of “protected persons”, such as these communities, other than for their own safety or for an urgent military need. Even then, it is permissible only on a temporary basis. These exceptions are not applicable in this case.
What is E1?
The E1 master plan (Plan No. 420/4) was approved in 1999. It covers approximately 1,200 hectares of land – most of which Israel declared as state land in a legally dubious procedure. During the 1990s these lands were made part of the jurisdiction of the settlement of Ma’ale Adumim, so it now encompasses approximately 4,800 hectares. The northern and southern edges of the plan largely correspond to the route planned for the Separation Barrier in the area, which would leave Ma’ale Adumim on the “Israeli” side of the barrier and separate it from neighboring areas of the West Bank. The E-1 compound is interspersed with enclaves of privately owned Palestinian land. The overall area of these enclaves is approximately 77.5 hectares. Israel was unable to declare them state land and they are not officially included in the plans. However, it is clear that the physical reality resulting from the plan will greatly limit Palestinian landowners’ access to their lands.
In addition to residential units, the plan designates areas for tourism, commerce, regional services, a regional cemetery, roads, etc. Detailed plans have already been approved for two of the plans, enabling the building permits to be issued:
- Plan 420/4/2 designates 135 hectares in the north-west section of the E1 compound, bordering on Jerusalem’s municipal jurisdiction, for a metropolitan employment and business center serving both Ma’aleh Adumim and the Jerusalem municipality. The plan, submitted by the Ministry of Industry and Trade and prepared by the firm of Reches-Eshkol, was approved in 2002 but has yet to be implemented.
- Plan 420/4/9 designates approximately 18 hectares for the Judea and Samaria district headquarters of the Israel Police. Approved in 2005, this plan has already been implemented, and the police headquarters has been in operation there since 2008. As part of the development of the area for the implementation of the plan, additional infrastructure was put in place, including the paving of roads, the construction of supporting walls, traffic roundabouts and street lighting, costing an estimated total of about NIS 200 million. The scale of this development is much larger than would be required simply for allowing access to the police headquarters. It appears to be part of the future development of the planned residential compound near the police headquarters.
At least three detailed plans for residential construction in the E-1 compound are being prepared, proposing 4,000 residential units and ten hotels. To date, Israeli governments have delayed any further construction in the area, partly because of strong objections on the part of the US administration and the European Union. According to media reports, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu promised the US president that he would not build in E-1. Nevertheless, in response to the UN decision to admit Palestine as an observer state, the government issued directives in late November 2012 to promote the detailed plans. Further to the government instructions, the Civil Administration approved the filing for objections of two of the three E-1 residential plans. The plans had not yet been filed in August 2013 and no progress had been made in the process of their approval.
Whom does the plan harm?
Implementation of the E1 plan will have significant repercussions for the entire population of the West Bank. Jerusalem borders on the narrowest area of the West Bank, where it spans only about 28 kilometers from east to west. Construction in E-1 will further reduce the already narrow corridor that connects the northern and southern West Bank and will impede the establishment of a Palestinian state with territorial contiguity. Israel is planning to build an alternative road that would connect between the two parts of the West Bank for use by Palestinians, but this is no more than a traffic solution.
Although all settlements are designated as closed military zones, this order is generally enforced only for their built-up areas. Implementation of the plan will result in the privately owned Palestinian lands inside E-1 becoming enclaves surrounded by built-up areas of settlements and there is concern that the landowners will not be able to access and farm these lands. The implementation of the plan will also harm the Bedouin communities in the area, whose access to grazing lands will be denied. In any case, the Civil Administration is already planning expulsion of the members of these communities. In addition, the roads currently used by Palestinians will become local roads used by settlers and Palestinians will be denied access to them. If no alternate roads are built, this access ban will significantly reduce Palestinian freedom of movement in the area.
Construction in E-1 will enclose East Jerusalem from the east and link up with the Israeli neighborhoods built north of the Old City. East Jerusalem is part of the West Bank and had once served as an urban center for West Bank residents. However, the ban Israel imposed on the entry of Palestinians into the city has artificially separated it from the rest of the West Bank. This separation will be intensified with the implementation of the E-1 plan.
Source:
http://www.btselem.org
Since its occupation of the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem following the 1967 war, the Israel Defense Force (IDF) has destroyed more than 18,000 Palestinian homes in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT). 
Meanwhile, Caterpillar, Inc., a U.S. company, has sold bulldozers to the IDF knowing they would be used to unlawfully demolish homes and put civilians in danger.
Why Are Homes Demolished in Palestine?Since 1967, the IDF has routinely demolished homes of Palestinians in the OPT. The practice of home demolitions, forced expulsion and land seizures increased dramatically after the second intifada began in September 2000. In the first four years of the second intifada, the IDF used bulldozers to destroy more than 4,000 Palestinian homes.
The IDF has provided several reasons for this practice, one being the need to create “buffer zones” in the OPT. In fact, the IDF’s home demolitions are part of a broad-reaching practice of collective punishment through “demographic engineering.” Through home demolitions, Palestinian populations are forced to move from areas deemed strategic or of interest to Israel and displaced from the agricultural land where they and their ancestors have lived and made their livelihoods. In addition to forcibly displacing more than 70,000 civilians, home demolitions have injured or killed Palestinian civilians, including the victims in Corrie, et. al. v. Caterpillar, Inc. Much of the world community, including the United Nations, the United States, and human rights organizations, has consistently condemned these demolitions.
How is Caterpillar involved?
Caterpillar has supplied the IDF with bulldozers used for home demolitions since 1967. Caterpillar has sold D9 bulldozers to the IDF knowing they would be used to unlawfully demolish homes and endanger civilians in the OPT. Caterpillar continued to sell D9’s directly to the IDF even though it knew that the bulldozers were being used to commit war crimes and other serious violations of law. The Caterpillar D9 bulldozer is over 13 feet tall and 26 feet wide, weighs more than 60 tons with its armored plating, and can raze houses within minutes. Caterpillar has had constructive notice of the human rights violations committed with its bulldozers since at least 1989, when human rights groups began publicly condemning the violations. Since 2001, human rights groups have sent over 50,000 letters to Caterpillar, Inc. executives and CEO Jim Owens decrying the use of its bulldozers to carry out human rights abuses.
The Facts
- More than 18,000 Palestinian homes have been demolished by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) since 1967.
- More than 4,000 of those homes were demolished after September 2000.
- From September 2000 until 2004, over 2,500 homes were demolished in Gaza; 1,600 of those were located in Rafah, a 2.5 mile long strip of land along the border of southern Gaza.
Corrie, et. al. v. Caterpillar, Inc. In 2005, a lawsuit was brought against Caterpillar, Inc. by families represented by CCR, the Ronald A. Peterson Law Clinic at Seattle University School of Law, the Public Interest Law Group PLLC, and the Palestinian Center for Human Rights. The suit charges that Caterpillar violated international, federal, and state law by selling D9 bulldozers to the IDF knowing they would be used to unlawfully demolish homes and endanger civilians in the OPT. In doing so, Caterpillar aided and abetted the war crimes committed by the IDF by knowingly providing assistance that had a substantial effect on the commission of the violation.
The five families in the case include Palestinians whose family members were killed or injured when Caterpillar bulldozers demolished their homes. The parents of Rachel Corrie, an American who was killed by a D9 while protecting a home in the OPT, are also plaintiffs in the case. The claims against Caterpillar, Inc. for selling bulldozers to the IDF include violations of:
- The Alien Tort Statute (ATS), a 1789 statute giving non-U.S. citizens the right to file suits in U.S. courts for international human rights violations.
- The Fourth Geneva Convention, Additional Protocol I, and customary international law, which prohibit war crimes such as collective punishment and destruction of civilian property not justified by military necessity.
- The Torture Victim Protection Act (TVPA), passed by Congress in 1992, which allows individuals to seek damages in U.S. courts for torture or extrajudicial killing, regardless of where the violations take place.
- In 2005, Judge Burgess in the Western District of Washington granted Caterpillar’s motion to dismiss the case without permitting discovery or hearing oral argument. CCR appealed the decision to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and oral arguments were heard on July 9, 2007. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal on September 17, 2007, under the political question doctrine. Plaintiffs filed a petition for rehearing or en banc which is currently pending.
The Plaintiffs
The Al Sho’bi family: Mahmoud Omar Al Sho’bi is from Nablus in the West Bank. In April 2002, a D9 bulldozer destroyed Mr. Al Sho’bi’s family home without warning in an IDF attack in the middle of the night. His father Umar, his sisters Fatima and Abir, his brother Samir, pregnant sister-in-law Nabila and their three children, ages 4, 7, and 9, were all killed. The Fayed family: Fathiya Muhammad Sulayman Fayed’s home was bulldozed during an IDF incursion into the Jenin Refugee Camp in 2002.
Hundreds of buildings were destroyed allegedly to clear paths for IDF tanks. During the demolition, her son, Jamal, who was paralyzed, needed assistance to get out of the house. While the IDF briefly stopped bulldozing so Fathiya could help Jamal, they quickly resumed demolition. Fathiya escaped, but was unable to get Jamal out, and he was killed. The Abu Hussein family: A D9 demolished the Abu Hussein family home in the al-Salam neighborhood of Rafah in 2002. Destruction began without warning at 5:00 a.m., injuring six family members inside. After being warned, IDF halted active demolition but fired on neighbors and relatives trying to evacuate those in the house. The Corrie family: Rachel Corrie, an American activist, went to Gaza with the International Solidarity Movement (ISM), a Palestinian-led movement using nonviolence to resist the Israeli occupation. In March 2003, Rachel stood in front of the Nasrallah family home to protect it from demolition while the family was inside. Despite her fluorescent orange jacket and fellow activists waiving to stop the soldiers, they drove over Rachel, crushing her to death.
The Khalafallah family: In a July 2004 incursion into Khan Yunis Refugee Camp, the IDF demolished over 70 homes. At midnight, a bulldozer approached the home of Ibrahim Khalafallah and his wife Eida, where they lived with their 5 children, 2 daughters-in-law and 4 grandchildren. Ibrahim, in his 70’s and sick, was unable to move. When the bulldozer hit the house, Eida tried to stop the driver, but he continued, destroying the home and killing Ibrahim.
Attached Files
http://ccrjustice.org/files/1.24.2011%20Caterpillar%20Factsheet%20.PDF
Source:
http://ccrjustice.org (Center for constitutional rights)
http://972mag.com/
Posted on: August 2013
By Idan Landau, translated from Hebrew by Ofer Neiman
When people summarize the Zionist project, with the fanfare of victory or the gloom of defeat, one thing will be certain, they will be puzzled over one strange mystery. 
How could so many people associate Zionism with creation and construction, and not with regression and destruction? After all, in parallel with the endless construction frenzy,especially beyond the green line, the hum of bulldozers has always been audible: beating, breaking, shattering. Housing projects for new Jewish immigrants were built in record speed. Build-your-own-house neighborhoods, neighborhoods for IDF career officers, commuter suburbs, and luxury residential towers popped up everywhere; and at the very same time, the angel of Zionist history left more and more piles of ruin and devastation behind.
The demolition policy has, of course, been the Arabs’ share. From time to time, the state demolishes a tiny shred of a Jewish outpost in the occupied territories; just going through the motions, while bowing sanctimoniously to the Israeli High Court of Justice (HCJ). Let no one compare the master race, whose members have the benefit of myriad legal options when building their house, to the enslaved race, whose members are denied access to land, everywhere, by mountains of legal barriers; those who wish and even succeed in building their home on stolen land, to those who wish and fail to build their home on their own private land; those whose house will be protected by the sovereign through a reign of terror imposed on their neighbors, to those who can only dream of having the sovereign’s protection.
And perhaps those analysts in the future will inquire further as to why so few Israelis knew about this devastation at all, even though it took place constantly, week by week. Hardly a day goes by between the Jordan River and the sea, without a demolition of an Arab home by the State of Israel. And they will be baffled by the short Israeli memory, a memory that had forgotten long ago that the foreign British rule had committed the same crimes against us. And the greatest mystery of all will regard those who had known, yet had always assumed that the demolition policy was right, appropriate, legally justified; those who had assumed, with unquestionable simplicity, that half of the population between the river and the sea, which happens to be the Arabic-speaking half, was also delinquent by nature, simply unable to abide by the laws of planning and construction; and not only that, the other half also suffered from such staggering folly and shortsightedness, that it brought those endless demolitions upon itself, impoverishing itself to perdition in the process. After all, would there be anything simpler than lawful planning, and lawful submission of plans, and lawful attainment of permits, followed by construction? In short, is there anything simpler than being Jewish?
Yes, that is what law-abiding Israelis think to themselves, and someone will be perplexed by this as well one day. Let us now put all this perplexity aside, and get back to the dismal reality of rubble and furniture lying upside down. It happens all the time, with hardly any media coverage; reports go through one ear and come out through the other. The hum of bulldozers is the constant background noise of Zionism. Listen to it for a few moments.
In 2011 alone, Israel demolished around 1,000 houses in the Bedouin villages in the Negev. The Ministry of Interior refuses to disclose data for 2012.
In 2012 alone, Israel demolished around 600 buildings throughout the West Bank. As a result, 880 people, more than half of them children, have lost their homes. Around 90 percent of the demolitions were carried out in Area C, and the rest in East Jerusalem.
As of now, more than 400 houses in neighborhoods of East Jerusalem are under the threat of imminent demolition.
Since 1967, Israel has demolished more than 28,000 Palestinian buildings in the Occupied Territories.
37 percent of state owned land on the West Bank has been allotted to Jewish settlements since 1967. Over the same period, just 0.7 percent of this land has been allotted to Palestinians.
Since 1967, East Jerusalem’s Palestinian population has grown by almost 250,000; throughout the same period, only 3,900 building permits have been issued in that part of the city.
Nearly half of East Jerusalem still does not have zoning plans, after 46 years. 35 percent of the planning area has been designated as “open view areas,” on which construction is prohibited. Just 17 percent of Palestinian East Jerusalem is available to residents for housing and construction, and these land resources have been nearly exhausted. Palestinian residents of East Jerusalem have no legal way of building houses.
Between 2005 and 2009, the construction of 18,000 housing units in Jerusalem was approved; just 13 percent of them were in Palestinian East Jerusalem.
In most parts of East Jerusalem, building density is restricted to 75 percent. In West Jerusalem, the rate goes up to 150 percent.
180,000 Palestinians who reside in Area C have to settle for just 0.5 percent of this area for legal construction.
In 2009-2010 just 13 out of 776 requests for building permits by Palestinians in Area C were approved, no more than 1.7 percent.
Demolition orders have been issued against the majority of the buildings in the 180-year-old village of Hirbet Susya, home to 250 people, and the same goes for the inhabitants of the Hirbet Dukaikah and Hirbet Zanuta (Hebrew), home to 550 people. The State of Israel intends to wipe out entire villages in Area C.
And what happens when you demolish the wrong house? Mistakes (by Jews) are paid for (by Arabs), and then you confess (to Jews) and get a warm embrace:
Excluding bodily and psychological harm, no graver cruelty can be inflicted on people than the demolition of their home. The financial consequence for most people is the loss of most of the capital they had accrued throughout their lives; being pushed back 20-30 years as far as their financial independence is concerned. But the demolition amounts of course to much more than that. It’s a demolition of the personal, intimate space where one’s most precious memories were formed; for a child – it is the space where all her/his intimate memories were formed. Every little detail of the house, seemingly trivial to the outside observer, is loaded with intensive meaning to those living in it. The tree in the backyard, the angle formed by shadows penetrating the room, the cracked door frame, the personal arrangement of clothes or toys. All these are wiped out in a brutal instant when the bulldozer goes over your house, and you are bound to feel disconnected – sheer detachment and floating in an alienating, impersonal space; this word, which has undergone such appalling devaluation in our language – “Trauma” – describes the situation precisely.
The State of Israel demolishes, time and time again. Here is a sequence of such demolitions, a devastating sequence, from the beginning of the year up to the past few days. It is impossible to document everything. Hundreds of photos, of every single house demolished by the state in the past six months, cannot be uploaded. One must perceive the catastrophe, but it is imperceptible. For now, we will settle for a sample. Hail the demolishing hero.
In 2011 alone, Israel demolished around 1,000 houses in the Bedouin villages in the Negev. The Ministry of Interior refuses to disclose data for 2012.
In 2012 alone, Israel demolished around 600 buildings throughout the West Bank. As a result, 880 people, more than half of them children, have lost their homes. Around 90 percent of the demolitions were carried out in Area C, and the rest in East Jerusalem.
As of now, more than 400 houses in neighborhoods of East Jerusalem are under the threat of imminent demolition.
Since 1967, Israel has demolished more than 28,000 Palestinian buildings in the Occupied Territories.
37 percent of state owned land on the West Bank has been allotted to Jewish settlements since 1967. Over the same period, just 0.7 percent of this land has been allotted to Palestinians.
Since 1967, East Jerusalem’s Palestinian population has grown by almost 250,000; throughout the same period, only 3,900 building permits have been issued in that part of the city.
Nearly half of East Jerusalem still does not have zoning plans, after 46 years. 35 percent of the planning area has been designated as “open view areas,” on which construction is prohibited. Just 17 percent of Palestinian East Jerusalem is available to residents for housing and construction, and these land resources have been nearly exhausted. Palestinian residents of East Jerusalem have no legal way of building houses.
Between 2005 and 2009, the construction of 18,000 housing units in Jerusalem was approved; just 13 percent of them were in Palestinian East Jerusalem.
In most parts of East Jerusalem, building density is restricted to 75 percent. In West Jerusalem, the rate goes up to 150 percent.
180,000 Palestinians who reside in Area C have to settle for just 0.5 percent of this area for legal construction.
In 2009-2010 just 13 out of 776 requests for building permits by Palestinians in Area C were approved, no more than 1.7 percent.
Demolition orders have been issued against the majority of the buildings in the 180-year-old village of Hirbet Susya, home to 250 people, and the same goes for the inhabitants of the Hirbet Dukaikah and Hirbet Zanuta (Hebrew), home to 550 people. The State of Israel intends to wipe out entire villages in Area C.
And what happens when you demolish the wrong house? Mistakes (by Jews) are paid for (by Arabs), and then you confess (to Jews) and get a warm embrace:
Source:
http://972mag.com/
Posted on: 25 November 2014
The Israeli Government’s use of house demolition as a punitive measure in response to alleged acts of violence by Palestinians must end immediately, two United Nations experts 
urged today, adding that the practice – which targets Palestinian homes in both Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory – is a violation of human rights law.
“All acts of violence require a firm response from the Israeli authorities, and those responsible should be tried before a court of law and sentenced for their crimes,” Makarim Wibisono, the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories, affirmed in apress release, adding, however, that the State “cannot go beyond what is sanctioned by international law.”
Mr. Wibisono’s remarks follow the 19 November demolition of the East Jerusalem home of Abd al-Rahman al-Shaludi, the Palestinian man accused of committing last month’s car attack in Jerusalem that claimed the lives of a 22 year-old woman and a three-month old child.
In addition to Mr. Al-Shaludi’s home, Israeli authorities have slated at least six other homes of Palestinian suspects located in East Jerusalem, Askar refugee camp, and Hebron, for demolition or sealing – the practice of completely or partially closing off the rooms of a home with concrete or metal sheeting, prohibiting family members from accessing their homes, at times indefinitely. Meanwhile, following a recent deadly attack against a Jerusalem synagogue, a number of other house demolitions are reportedly being prepared.
“In the case of Mr. Al-Shaludi, who was shot and killed by Israeli police at the scene of the attack, the demolition of his home in the middle of the night served no other purpose than to punish his innocent parents and five siblings, rendering them homeless,” Leilani Farha, the Special Rapporteur on the right to adequate housing, explained.
“Simply put: the use of house demolition as a punitive measure is a form of collective punishment contrary to international law,” she continued. “Israel must immediately end its use of this devastating practice.”
The recent house demolitions come within a context of increasing tensions – marked by a number of fatal incidents – between Palestinians and Israelis.
However, the two Special Rapporteurs warned that an upsurge in demolitions would “only add to the frustration and despair felt by the people living under prolonged military occupation, and sow the seeds of more hatred and violence for the future.”
“The only means to stop this cycle of violence is for Israel to place human rights at the centre of its policy-making,” Mr. Wibisono concluded.
Source:
-Why does Israel demolish Palestinian homes?
The policy of house demolitions has two goals: first, to make life so miserable for the Palestinians that they leave the country. It is estimated that up to 300,000 Palestinians have left the West Bank and East Jerusalem in the past ten years, most of them middle-class, young, educated, and economically active. This is what we refer to as “selective transfer,” and it is intended to weaken Palestinian society and make it more malleable to Israeli rule. Second, to drive Palestinians off their land in Area C and into Areas A and B. This has largely succeeded. Area C is 62% of the West Bank, yet today contains only about 5% of the (West Bank) Palestinian population.
-How many houses have been demolished since the Occupation began?
Since 1967, about 27,000 Palestinian homes and other structures (livestock pens and fencing for example) crucial for a family’s livelihood, have been demolished in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT), including East Jerusalem. It is impossible to know how many homes exactly because the Israeli authorities only report on the demolition of “structures,” which may be homes or may be other structures. When a seven-story apartment building is demolished containing more than 20 housing units that is considered only one demolition. Some homes are as yet incomplete when they are demolished, but the financial loss to families (70% of the Palestinians live below the poverty line, on less than $2 a day), plus the inability to obtain decent and adequate housing, constitutes a fundamental violation of tens of thousands of people to shelter.
-What are the reasons given by the Israeli government for demolishing Palestinian homes?
Throughout the OPT Israel follows a policy of not granting Palestinians building permits. How is this done in a country that claims to be a democracy? Discrimination against Palestinians (and this is true for the Palestinian citizens of Israel as well) is embedded in the dry technicalities of planning, zoning, and administration. Almost the entire West Bank has been declared by Israel “agricultural land,” so that when Palestinians request permission to build on their own properties they are refused. Virtually all of East Jerusalem has been zoned as “open green space,” meaning a Palestinian can own land but cannot build upon it, the land being “reserved” for future urban development (read: Israeli settlements and roads). In Jerusalem, moreover, the official policy of the Israeli government is to maintain a 72%-28% majority of Jews over Arabs in the city (the actual ratio today is about 64%-36%). All urban policies related to housing and residence – permits for Palestinians to live in the city (they only have permanent residency that can be revoked, not Israeli citizenship), land expropriation and zoning restrictions, house demolitions, settlement expansion into Palestinian neighborhoods, the isolation of East Jerusalem from the rest of Palestinian society and its subsequent impoverishment, routes of highways through Palestinian communities or, conversely, neglect of Palestinian infrastructure – are tied to what in Israel is called the “Quiet Transfer,”: reducing, fragmenting and isolating as much as possible the Palestinian presence in order to “judaize” Jerusalem (an official term actually used by the Israeli government in planning).
-Are house demolitions a form of punishment to terrorism?
No. In only 2% of the 27,000 cases of demolition were security reasons given. In fact, the IDF officially stopped their policy of punitive demolitions in 2005.
-Why do Palestinians build if they know their houses are likely to be demolished?
Palestinians simply have no choice. The Israeli Occupation has lasted for over 45 years, two generations. Couples have families, often 7-8 kids, and their kids have kids; they all need places to live (In Palestinian culture, a young man cannot marry unless he can offer his bride a home). Most continue to live in inadequate conditions, often crowded in with their parents, whose own home is too small and cannot be enlarged. Those that are desperate make a cold calculation: Israel has issued tens of thousands of demolition orders. Maybe, if I build, they won’t come for a year, maybe three years; maybe I’ll “win the lottery” and they will never come. So, left without a choice, Palestinian families gamble. For most, simply a decent home where they can live in security and raise their families is just a dream.
-If the West Bank is zoned as agricultural land and Palestinian building in East Jerusalem is prevented to preserve open green space, then how did Israel manage to construct the settlements – about 350,000 Israelis living in more than 120 officially-recognized
The answer is simple: Israelis sit on the planning committees. The Jerusalem municipality constitutes the District Planning Commission and the Ministry of Interior has the Regional Planning Commission. To rezone land from agricultural/green space to residential takes a minute if that is the intention of the these planning bodies, both of whom vigorously advance the settlement movement while restricting (or completely preventing) Palestinian construction. Then there is the Civil Administration, Israel’s military government, who through the IDF Commander of the Central Command can expropriate any land in the West Bank for “immediate military purposes”, that often later become Jewish settlements.
– Are Israel’s house demolitions legal under international law?
No. Under the Fourth Geneva Convention, Occupying Powers are prohibited from destroying property or employing collective punishment. Article 53 reads: “Any destruction by the Occupying Power of real or personal property belonging individually or collectively to private persons…is prohibited.” Under this provision the practice of demolishing Palestinian houses is banned, as is the wholesale destruction of the Palestinian infrastructure.
-Are Israeli settlements legal under international law?
No. Under Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, Israel is prohibited from establishing settlements: “The Occupying Power shall not transfer parts of its own civilian population into territories it occupies.”
– What other international laws does the Israeli Occupation violate?
Virtually all of Israel’s occupation of Palestinian lands violates human rights conventions – and especially the Fourth Geneva Convention that forbids an occupying power from making its presence a permanent one. Thus:
- Articles 50 and 51 of the “Protocols Additional to the 1949 Geneva Convention” emphasize the protection of civilians in time of war. “The civilian population comprises all persons who are civilians…. The civilian population and individual civilians shall enjoy general protection against dangers arising from military operations.”
- Article 3 prohibits “outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment,” a routine element of Palestinian life under Israel’s occupation.
- Article 32 forbids assassinations, and any brutalization of the civilian population, including their treatment at checkpoints and in “security searches.”
- Article 33 prohibiting pillage would obtain to Israel’s extensive use of West Bank and Gazan water resources, especially as they are denied the local population. It also prohibits the use of collective punishment, as represented by the imposition of closure, curfew, house demolitions and many other routine actions of the Occupation Authorities.
- Article 39 stipulates: “Protected persons [residents of occupied lands] who, as a result of the war, have lost their gainful employment, shall be granted the opportunity to find paid employment.” It thereby prohibits the imposition a permanent “closure” on the Occupied Territories, such as Israel has done since 1993.
- Article 64 forbids changes in the local legal system that, among other things, alienate the local population from its land and property, as Israel has done through massive land expropriations.
- Article 146 holds accountable individuals who have committed “grave breaches” of the Convention. According to Article 147, this includes many acts routinely practiced under the Occupation, such as willful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, willfully causing great suffering or serious injury, unlawful deportation, taking of hostages, extensive destruction, and appropriation of property. Israeli courts have thus far failed to charge or prosecute Israeli officials, military personnel or police who have committed such acts.
- The PLO also bears a measure of responsibility for the violations of its own people’s rights under the Fourth Geneva Convention. According to Article 8, the PLO had no right in the Oslo Agreements to abrogate their rights and suspend the applicability of the Convention, since “Protected persons may in no circumstances renounce in part or in entirety the rights secured to them by the present Convention.” Had international humanitarian law been the basis of the Oslo peace process rather than power-negotiations, the Occupation would have ended and the conditions for a just peace would have been established, since virtually every element of Israel’s occupation violates a provision of the Fourth Geneva Convention.
-How much of the OPT do Palestinians actually control?
All the OPT comprises only 22% of historic Palestine between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River. The fragmentation of the Palestinian territories began in the Oslo “peace process,” when in the Oslo II agreement of 1995 the West Bank was divided into Areas A, B and C. Today the Palestinian Authority controls Area A (18% of the West Bank, though in fact Israel invades at will) and Area B (another 22% of the West Bank, although Israel controls the security and patrols the territory). Area C, 60 of the West Bank (where the settlements are), is under full Israeli control. East Jerusalem, where 240,000 Palestinian live and which the international community considers occupied territory, has been formally annexed by Israel and, from Israel’s perspective, is not part of the occupied territories. The PA is forbidden to have any presence in East Jerusalem. Gaza, only 6.5% of the OPT, is under PA/Hamas control. Under the Oslo agreements Gaza is considered an integral unit of the OPT and should be treated as one in the same as the West Bank. In fact, Israel has besieged and isolated it completely in the late 1980s.All in all, then, the Palestinian sort of control about 40% of the OPT and thus only 10% of historic Palestine.
– What aspects of the Israeli Occupation of the West Bank and Gaza are most likely to be denied or ignored by the average Israeli?
All of it. It’s hard to convey, but Israeli Jews just don’t care about the Occupation. They don’t see it, it does not affect their lives, they live in relative prosperity and security, the “Arabs” (the term Palestinians is not even used) are “over there” somewhere – in short, the Occupation (another term we don’t use in Israel, preferring just to refer to “the Territories”) is a non-issue.
Source:
http://www.icahd.org
More...
risus enim amet nibh faucibus ante purus mollis quam, lobortis tempus donec urna ornare duis nisi curae ante sit vitae, nisl vivamus cubilia fringilla ligula faucibus nam vestibulum diam. mattis sollicitudin nam phasellus in magna metus, mollis est porta venenatis phasellus curabitur gravida, curae non congue in nisi.
Suscipit sapien vivamus eu neque egestas nulla aliquam risus ad mattis elementum, tincidunt sociosqu nunc nisi dictumst volutpat feugiat euismod lobortis curabitur. consectetur aenean lacinia auctor habitant enim sem ligula lacinia himenaeos, velit ullamcorper suspendisse ante leo magna ad conubia egestas donec, facilisis taciti placerat inceptos arcu id imperdiet curabitur.
Cursus lacinia fusce ut mi pretium convallis nulla turpis, taciti facilisis conubia consequat est aliquam eu fermentum convallis, at fermentum at tortor integer nisl vestibulum. ante aenean scelerisque tellus faucibus facilisis sagittis augue donec, sapien morbi quis cursus dui platea etiam enim nisl, curae elementum posuere eget habitasse lobortis nostra.