Sunday, February 02, 2020

Quiet Australians decide it is time to speak up on climate change action

By Tracy Bowden Updated Wed 29/1/2020
PHOTO: Rod and Margot Cunich hold vigils outside Dave Sharma's electoral office. (Supplied: Simon Cunich)

For the first time in his life, semi-retired lawyer Rod Cunich is so angry about a political issue he feels he needs to take action.

Key points:

Concern about climate change has become a key political issue for a growing number Australians

A perceived lack of government action has prompted many people to protest for the first time in their lives

Many new demonstrators are looking for an alternative to rowdy mass demonstrations

Concern about climate change has prompted him and his GP wife Margot to take to the streets.


"We decided we need to stand up and try to motivate people who ordinarily wouldn't be motivated, those quiet people who sit by, are concerned and do nothing," he told 7.30.

"I hope it is going to bring people like us, what we call quiet Australians, to ask their local members … to advocate for us and ask for proper climate change policy," Margot Cunich added.

They are just two of an emerging group of new activists.
'Ordinary Australians'
PHOTO: Rob Henderson's placard among other signs at the vigil.
 (Supplied: Simon Cunich)

It was a smoky summer holiday, as bushfires raged on the south coast of New South Wales, that sparked the Cunichs into action.

"We spent the whole ten days being locked inside because of smoke and then our PM being overseas and coming back and down-playing the role of climate change in the fires," Mr Cunich said.

But the couple was looking for an alternative to the large, often rowdy, protests being staged on the issue.

They organised a quiet protest outside the office of their federal MP, Liberal member Dave Sharma, in Sydney's eastern suburbs.

"I look at the protests and I think, they're young activists or old activists who can be easily dismissed as ratbags doing their own thing, we can ignore them. And I've been guilty of that," he said.

"We want to distinguish ourselves from those groups and say, look, we're just ordinary Australians, we're not radical but our votes count."

The self-described swinging voter took out an ad promoting the vigil in his local newspaper and set up a Facebook page.

There were many messages of support in response, but they also struck major opposition from climate change deniers.

"I haven't had a death threat but a lot of things not far short of that," Mr Cunich said.

On the day, more than 250 people turned up, many of them taking part in something like it for the very first time.

"I saw the note going out about quiet Australians and I thought, there's no excuse for not showing up," demonstrator Kirsten Dreese told 7.30.

"If you're quiet, if you're an introvert like me, we should all be doing something."

Rob Henderson was another novice protester.

"It's a first for me holding up a placard, that's for sure," he told 7.30, while holding up a sign reading, "Quiet Australians sick of hot air".

A growing issue

 
PHOTO: Erin Remblance has become an active climate change
 protester because of her three children. (ABC News: Nikki Tugwell)

Erin Remblance, a mother of three young children, has also decided to take action, but in a different way.

Two years ago, she knew little about the details of climate change.

"I wouldn't have even described myself as being an environmentalist or a [greenie]," she told 7.30.

"I'd never been to a protest, that wasn't my style."

But, now she's attended a series of major protests and strikes in Sydney and has made practical changes to reduce the family's carbon emissions.

"I assumed [climate change] was being looked after. I wrongly assumed the governments would look after us and do the things that were right," she said.

10 years of climate policy inertia 

Ten years ago one man's plan blew apart Australia's two great parties irrevocably just as they teetered toward consensus on climate change, the most divisive issue of the Australian political century.

"Now I've become aware that actually that's not happening and there needs to be more leadership on this issue.

"I'm fighting for my children's futures."

The latest survey by research group IPSOS shows a jump in concern for the environment.

The proportion of Australians citing climate change as their key concern jumped from 24 per cent in May 2019 to 41 per cent in January this year, coming in ahead of issues such as healthcare and the cost of living.


Dan Evans from IPSOS says the research also shows a broader age group aware of the issue.

"Older Australians, the Boomer cohort, are becoming more concerned," Dan Evans from IPSOS told 7.30.

"But in a broad sense, everyone's a bit more concerned.

"At the federal election that was the fourth most important issue facing the nation, now it's clearly the top concern.
"

Is the Government doing enough?
 
PHOTO: The crowd outside Dave Sharma's electoral office
 demanding action on climate change. (Supplied: Simon Cunich)

Wentworth MP Dave Sharma declined 7.30's request for an interview.

But Prime Minister Scott Morrison has consistently said the Government is acting to reduce emissions and insists Australia will "meet and beat the emissions reduction targets".

Daniel Wild, from the free-market think-tank the Institute of Public Affairs, understands the demonstrators' concerns about the bushfires this summer but says the Government is already acting.

"One of the points these protesters seem to be making is that Australia isn't doing anything when it comes to reducing emissions," he told 7.30.

"Well, that's just not true.

"Australia has the deepest cuts to emissions per capita under the Paris (climate) Agreement, which is the Government's policy."

Rod and Margot Cunich don't believe it is enough.

They are planning quiet demonstrations every four weeks for as long as it takes and they want others across the nation to follow their lead.

"It's non-partisan, we don't care who the politician is," he said.

"Every single politician, in our view, should be taking climate change seriously and doing something about it."

---30---
AUSTRALIA
Climate change warriors plan to throw the peak-hour commute into chaos TODAY with mass street-blocking protests


Mass 'Hong Kong style' protest threatening to throw peak-hour traffic into chaos 

Protest will see hundreds swarm central Melbourne and will begin at 5pm Friday

Police urged organisers to cancel as officers taken from bushfire communities

By KELSEY WILKIE FOR DAILY MAIL AUSTRALIA 30 January 2020 

A mass 'Hong Kong style' protest is threatening to throw peak-hour traffic into chaos as hundreds of students flood the streets calling for action on climate change.

The protest through central Melbourne, which will begin at 5pm, has been organised by Uni Students for Climate Justice with the intention of causing as much disruption as possible.

Hong Kong's anti-government protests, which began in June last year, caused widespread chaos, with thousands clogging streets wearing masks and often clashing with police.

A mass 'Hong Kong style' protest is threatening to throw peak-hour traffic into chaos as hundreds of students flood the streets calling for action on climate change (Pictured: Activists from in a protest in Melbourne last year)

The protest through central Melbourne, which will begin at 5pm, has been organised by Uni Students for Climate Justice with the intention of causing as much chaos as possible (pictured: Activists from in a protest in Melbourne last year)

While the protests began peacefully, they increasingly descended into violence after demonstrators became frustrated with the government’s response.

Protesters have previously used bricks, umbrellas and traffic barriers to barricade roads.

Police have urged organisers of the Melbourne rally to cancel the event as they will have to pull officers away from working in bushfire-ravaged communities to manage the disruption to the city.

'To conduct an event which drains that number of police resources away from its number one priority, is really stretching us. It is not considerate,' North West Metro Region acting assistant commissioner Tim Hansen told the Herald Sun.
Students protest for action on climate change in Melbourne

Hong Kong's anti-government protests, which began in June last year, caused widespread chaos, with thousands clogging streets wearing masks and often clashing with police

Anti-government protesters march during anti-parallel trading protest at Sheung Shui, a border town in Hong Kong, China in January

Organiser Natalie Acreman said she was 'sick of talking about the police' and felt there issue was not a resourcing issue.

'This isn't about resources, this is about trying to stop people from talking about climate change.

'These protests are about sending the message loud and clear — to both the federal and state governments — that until we see real climate action, business as usual will not be allowed to continue.'

Organisers have planned for the activists to swarm the streets 'like water' appearing and disappearing in various locations.

Police have urged organisers to cancel the event as they will have to pull officers away from working in bushfire ravaged communities to manage the disruption to the city

Organiser Natalie Acreman said she was 'sick of talking about the police' and felt there issue was not a resourcing issue. 

'This isn't about resources, this is about trying to stop people from talking about climate change. 
'These protests are about sending the message loud and clear — to both the federal and state governments — that until we see real climate action, business as usual will not be allowed to continue.'

Organisers have planned for the activists to swarm the streets 'like water' appearing and disappearing in various locations. 

Read more:
Defiant climate activists snub police plea over resourcing fears on peak fire day


Climate change warriors plan mass ‘Hong Kong-style’ protests in Melbourne today

BY DENIS BEDOYA ON FEBRUARY 1, 2020 NEWS

A mass ‘Hong Kong style’ protest is threatening to throw peak-hour traffic into chaos as hundreds of students flood the streets calling for action on climate change.

The protest through central Melbourne, which will begin at 5pm, has been organised by Uni Students for Climate Justice with the intention of causing as much disruption as possible.

Hong Kong’s anti-government protests, which began in June last year, caused widespread chaos, with thousands clogging streets wearing masks and often clashing with police.

While the protests began peacefully, they increasingly descended into violence after demonstrators became frustrated with the government’s response.

Protesters have previously used bricks, umbrellas and traffic barriers to barricade roads.

Police have urged organisers of the Melbourne rally to cancel the event as they will have to pull officers away from working in bushfire-ravaged communities to manage the disruption to the city.

‘To conduct an event which drains that number of police resources away from its number one priority, is really stretching us. It is not considerate,’ North West Metro Region acting assistant commissioner Tim Hansen told the Herald Sun.

Organiser Natalie Acreman said she was ‘sick of talking about the police’ and felt there issue was not a resourcing issue.

‘This isn’t about resources, this is about trying to stop people from talking about climate change.

‘These protests are about sending the message loud and clear — to both the federal and state governments — that until we see real climate action, business as usual will not be allowed to continue.’

Organisers have planned for the activists to swarm the streets ‘like water’ appearing and disappearing in various locations.

----30---

BE LIKE WATER
BRUCE LEE 
Image result for kato green hornet


Protests are essential part of politics, Berry tells conference participants

Dr. Mary Frances Berry delivers the opening address for the 2020 Leadership Conference Celebrating African American History Month.

February 1, 2020

Dr. Mary Frances Berry on Friday told participants in the Leadership Conference Celebrating African American History Month that protests play a vital role in politics.

Speaking during the opening session of the conference at Troy University on Friday night, Berry drew on her experiences with “protests that worked” such as the Free South Africa Movement, the protests that led to the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Black Lives Matter movement to identify leadership qualities necessary for success.

The Leadership Conference Celebrating African American History Month was launched in 2002 by the University and the City of Troy to promote dialogue that fosters multicultural collaboration and equip diverse leaders with tools to better serve their organizations and communities. This year’s theme is “Effective Leadership: Civically, Economically and Socially.”

“When I see wrong being done, I don’t care where it is, what it is, who’s doing it, how big or small they are, I can not sit still,” Berry said. “I have seen and been a part of protests that have worked. My belief in protest as a tradition is real.”

Her belief the ability of protests to bring about policy change led her to write her latest book, “History Teaches Us to Resist: How Progressive Movements Have Succeeded in Challenging Times,” in which she examined the successful tactics of movements that ended the Vietnam War, jump-started government response to the AIDS epidemic, championed the Americans with Disabilities Act and advanced civil, women’s and LGBTQ rights.

“All of these things require courage, they require conviction and they require strategy,” she said. “It doesn’t help the people you are trying to help if you have strategy that doesn’t work because you have thought enough about it. You need education and you need to be able to think strategically, but you also need to be able to put your body on the line.”

First and foremost, persistence is key in any successful protest, she said.

“The first thing you must have is persistence. If you are not persistent, you will not get anything done,” Berry said.

True leadership, Berry said, requires an attitude of service before self.

“To me leadership means being courageous and not caring about yourself so much but caring about other people,” she said. “Be thoughtful and mindful about what you think and propose. If you work in that way maybe we will someday realize what I have always wanted for this country – liberty and justice for all.”

For more than four decades, Berry has been one of the most visible and respected activists in the causes of civil rights, gender equality and social justice. Serving as the chairperson of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, she led the charge for equal rights and liberties for all Americans over the course of four Presidential administrations.

Berry became the first woman of any race to head a major research university as Chancellor of the University of Colorado at Boulder. She is the Geraldine R. Segal Professor of American Social Thought and Professor of History at the University of Pennsylvania, where she teaches the history of American law and the history of law and social policy.

Berry received the Nelson Mandela award from the South African Government for her role in organizing the Free South Africa Movement, raising global awareness of South African injustice that helped to end more than 40 years of apartheid. She also served as assistant secretary for education in the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare.

The Leadership Conference Celebrating African American History Month continued on Saturday with the closing keynote address being delivered by Peggy Wallace Kennedy.

Bolivia detains, frees asylum-bound allies of ousted leader

LA PAZ, Bolivia (AP) — Two former Bolivian officials headed to asylum abroad with a government guarantee of safe conduct were briefly detained at the airport on Saturday, but were finally allowed to fly out of the country.
The detention of former Mining Minister César Navarro and the former deputy minister of rural development, Pedro Damián Dorado, aroused widespread criticism and momentarily inflamed the conflict between partisans of ousted leftist President Evo Morales and the conservative interim government that replaced him.
The two had taken refuge at the Mexican ambassador’s residence in La Paz after Morales resigned under pressure in November, and the new government finally agreed to grant them safe passage to fly to Mexico.
But police detained them at the airport before dawn Saturday. Navarro is accused of electoral fraud in the disputed October presidential vote in which Morales claimed to have won reelection, while Dorado was wanted on charges of influence peddling and misuse of public goods.
Morales, exiled in neighboring Argentina, quickly shot off a tweet saying that even in the worst dictatorships, safe conduct passes were respected.” Even Morales’ election rival, former President Carlos Mesa, urged the government to reverse course. Argentina’s government also condemned the detention.
The Foreign and Interior Ministries soon reiterated their pledge of safe conduct and the two men were released.
Escorted by diplomats from the European Union and Mexico, as well as a Catholic bishop, they returned to the airport and boarded a plane headed for Peru and were then expected to go on to Mexico.
Interior Minister Arturo Murillo attributed the “incident” to a “lack of coordination” between police and the prosecutor’s office.
Morales, who governed Bolivia for nearly 14 years, resigned the presidency in November when the police and army withdrew support after several weeks of protests over allegations of fraud in the Oct. 20 presidential election.


The interim government led by Jeanine Áñez has moved to prosecute Morales and several of his associates, and has reversed many of his policies ahead of scheduled elections on May 3. Morales is barred from that election


Protesters march in Lebanon to reject new government

BEIRUT (AP) — Hundreds of Lebanese marched on Saturday through the streets of the capital and the main northern city to reject a new government named to deal with an economic crisis, which they say lacks a popular mandate.
The new government named in January came after weeks of political stalemate and amid nationwide protests while Lebanon grappled with an unprecedented economic crisis.
Backed by the two main blocs in parliament, the government is awaiting a vote of confidence, which it is likely to get. But protesters say the government is an extension of traditional political parties they have denounced as corrupt.
“We are here today and every day … to say no confidence,” a protester who read a joint statement for the rallies said. It said the protesters won’t give another chance “to those who robbed them of their dreams, impoverished them, forced them to migrate, and humiliated them.” They vowed to keep up the pressure against a ruling class ”that controls decision-making and resources.”
Lebanon’s nationwide protests broke out Oct. 17 after a summer of discontent over a slumping economy and an austerity budget. The protests, sparked by proposals for new taxes, snowballed into demands for the ruling elite to step aside.
Lebanon’s ruling class has been in power since the end of the 1975-90 civil war, including some of its warlords. Protesters accuse them of mismanaging Lebanon’s wealth and of widespread corruption.
The new 20-member government of Prime Minister Hassan Diab was announced in late January but protests continued.
In recent weeks, demonstrations have turned violent as frustration rose. Security forces and protesters clashed outside the country’s parliament and the central bank in pitched street battles that left hundreds injured. Rights groups denounced the security forces’ use of rubber bullets to disperse the crowds. Over the last week, security forces erected blast walls around parliament and other government buildings, sealing them off from protesters and turning central Beirut into a fortified security zone.
On Saturday, protesters marched through the streets of Beirut and Tripoli, in the north, carrying banners against corruption and declaring “no confidence” in the new government. They stopped at the central bank, the Finance Ministry and the Banks Association before reaching central Beirut. The protesters gathered by the blast walls outside the parliament and the government building before dispersing peacefully.
Lebanon has one of the world’s highest public debts, standing at more than 150% of gross domestic product. Growth has plummeted and the budget deficit reached 11% of GDP in 2 018 as economic activities slowed and remittances from Lebanese living abroad shrank.
The national currency, which has been pegged to the dollar since 1997, lost about 60% of its value in recent weeks, sparking a run on banks which responded with limits on cash withdrawals and transfers
Opinion
‘American Dirt’ Has Us Talking. That’s a Good Thing.

The publishing industry changed its opinion of Mexican immigrant stories only after someone outside our community wrote one.
By Reyna Grande
Ms. Grande is a Mexican-American author.
Jan. 30, 2020


A portion of the United States-Mexico border fence in El Paso.
Credit...Tamir Kalifa for The New York Times

Last fall, I was sent an advance copy of Jeanine Cummins’s new novel, “American Dirt,” and a request for an endorsement. As a Mexican-American woman and an immigrant, it was clear to me that I was not the intended audience for this story. And yet, I found it compelling. I noticed its shortcomings, the things she got wrong about our culture and experience, but saw past them. I felt that a book like this could complement the Latino immigrant literature that has and will continue to be written by Latino writers, myself included.

I was born in Mexico, in the troubled state of Guerrero, where the main characters of “American Dirt” are from. It was in my hometown, Iguala, where 43 college students were abducted and disappeared in 2014, so the violence rang true to me. I am a native Spanish speaker, but my own books are riddled with Spanish mistakes because I was in fifth grade when I came to the United States.

I hoped that “American Dirt” would generate more discussion about the border and the anti-immigrant mentality that has dominated our society for too long. And it is doing just that, but in an unexpected way. It is raising awareness about another kind of border — the walls that the publishing industry puts up for Latino writers.

I’m no stranger to borders. When I was 9, I left my home in Guerrero and risked my life to cross the United States-Mexico border on foot with my father and siblings. With the help of the coyote, the guide my father hired, we got past la migra, the border agents patrolling the unforgiving no man’s land just north of the border with Tijuana. After we crossed, the coyote drove us up Interstate 5 to our new home in Los Angeles. I remember sighing with relief, thinking the worst was behind me.

I was wrong. I learned that American society is very good at hindering its immigrant population by putting up barriers — real and metaphorical. I soon discovered there were more borders to cross — cultural, linguistic, legal, educational, economic and more. When I chose to pursue a career in writing, a field that is predominantly white, I realized that the publishing industry too had borders and people who patrol them. A 2019 survey of diversity in publishing found that 78 percent of executives, 85 percent of editors, 80 percent of critics and 80 percent of agents are white.

Once upon a time, being a border crosser was a source of shame for me. But when I got older, I realized that it was my superpower. When I began my journey toward my dream of writing professionally, I told myself, “If I could successfully cross the U.S.-Mexico border, I can cross any border!”

It took me three tries to cross that geographical border. It took me 27 attempts to get past the gatekeepers of the publishing industry who time and time again make Latino writers feel that our stories don’t matter. We are often told that there are no readers for our immigrant tales, that “these kinds” of stories about our pain and suffering don’t sell well, that immigrant stories have been told enough times and why can’t we write something new and different, something more marketable?

After 26 rejections, I finally got across the publishing border because an African-American editor felt that my novel about a Mexican immigrant girl was worthy of being read, that my voice deserved to be heard. She gave me a $20,000 book deal and her blessing.

I considered myself lucky. There are so many more Latino writers who never get across — whose writing dreams perish in the unwelcoming literary landscape.

Editors’ Picks
Pakistan’s First Social Media Star and the Forces That Enabled Her Murder


For the last 13 years, I’ve traveled the country talking about my immigrant experience. On stages across the United States, I bare my soul and relive the trauma of moments I’d rather forget, to help people understand that immigration is not a crime but an act of survival, that immigrants are not criminals but human beings who deserve to be treated with dignity and compassion.




The cover of “American Dirt” by Jeanine Cummins.Credit...Flatiron Books, via Associated Press

Sometimes, my words help open minds and hearts. Other times, they don’t. Recently, “The Moth Radio Hour” aired my story about a chance encounter on an airplane with a Guatemalan asylum seeker. An email later appeared in my inbox, and when I read it, I thought of “American Dirt” and its intended white audience:

You are an excellent speaker and clearly very sincere. However, I and many others completely disagree with your point of view. Illegals in the country, that is adults that came into the USA without proper permission should all be deported as soon as practicable and there never should be any amnesty in the future for anybody [shouldn’t have happened in the past eather] the young man you talked about should have been removed and sent back to where he came from, I do not want him here in my country. and no Dreamers that came here illegally should never be allowed to be citizens. And if it was up to me their children would not be alow to become citizens ether.

Maybe I am being naïve in thinking that this man and others like him might be more willing to show compassion toward immigrants if they heard it from someone other than a first- or second-generation immigrant. But after having spent my entire writing career advocating immigrant rights, I appreciate when another writer joins the fight. We need all the voices we can get, within and outside our community — perhaps especially from outside our community. I had hoped Ms. Cummins’s words would germinate in the toxic American dirt where my own words, and those of other Latino writers, have often failed to take root.

When I read “American Dirt,” I didn’t know the back story — the bidding war, the seven-figure advance, the proclamation that this was the immigration book of its time. When I found out, I confess it offended me and hurt me. I felt undervalued and deceived. The publishing industry had changed its opinion of Mexican immigrant stories — but not until it was someone from outside our community who had written one. I had seen Ms. Cummins as a writer who could speak with us, not for us. Instead, the publishing machine decided to put her book on a pedestal.

It is unfortunate that the publisher canceled the author’s future book events. That denies audiences across the country the opportunity to participate in face-to-face discussions with Ms. Cummins about the issues that are being raised around cultural appropriation and who gets to tell our stories. The reasons the publisher cited for the cancellation — “safety concerns” — and its dismissal of the legitimate concerns raised as “vitriolic rancor,” further denigrates the Latino community. Now is not the time to shut down conversations, but to encourage speaking out and listening to one another.

To me the issue is neither with the book nor its author, but rather with those institutions that silence some voices while elevating others. One positive outcome is that publishers have shown they are willing to pay top dollar and use the full strength of their marketing machine to promote the immigrant experience. They can’t back away from that now. Immigrant-written stories deserve the same treatment.

‘American Dirt’ Is Proof the Publishing Industry Is BrokenJan. 27, 2020

As ‘American Dirt’ Racks Up Sales, Its Author Becomes the Story Jan. 25, 2020

\Reyna Grande, @reynagrande, is the author of “A Dream Called Home.”

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.
Extinction Rebellion protests inside busy Cambridge shopping centre

It is the latest protest of many by the group across the city



By Ella Pengelly 1 FEB 2020 NEWS 

 
Protesters inside the Grafton Centre (Image: Cambridge News)

Environmental activists Extinction Rebellion have launched another protest inside a busy Cambridge shopping centre.

This time the group will set up themselves up inside the main entrance to the Grafton Centre between Next, Boots and Gail's Bakery.

Protesters will position themselves on the floor outside the shops from 11am until 12.30pm today (Saturday February 1), carrying out what they are calling a Silent Rebellion.

So far in Cambridge they have held five of these Silent Rebellions and this time round they are inviting the public to join them on the floor of a public space.

On the group's Facebook page, they say: "Bring stillness to your mind and to a shopping centre. Meditate (or silently reflect) together, openly and beautifully expressing your choice to choose contentment over consumption.

"50 of you caused quite a spectacle in the Grand Arcade in last week’s 5th Silent Rebellion. We look forward to seeing you anytime between 11am and 12.30pm."

This Saturday's sit in comes after over a week of action carried out by the group across Cambridge.

Last Saturday (January 25) Extinction Rebellion launch another silent protest but this time it was in the Grand Arcade. The day before that,(January 24), activists chained themselves to Cambridge's 'tent building', the home of American oil firm Schlumberger.

We will be bringing you all the latest from this sit in including pictures and videos live from the event.

For all the updates on this silent protest you can follow our live blog below.
17:08

Last update

The protest is now over and this will be the last update in this live blog.

In total around 30 people turned out today to the Silent Rebellion held in the Grafton Centre.

So far in Cambridge they have held five of these Silent Rebellions and this time round they asked the public to join them on the floor of a public space.


This Saturday’s sit in comes after over a week of action carried out by the group across Cambridge. You can find more of our XR coverage on our homepage.

Environmental activists Extinction Rebellion have launched another protest inside the Grafton Centre (Image: davidjohnsonphotographic.co.uk)
12:52

"The future of humanity and indeed all life on earth depends on us"
"The future of humanity and indeed all life on earth depends on us" (Image: davidjohnsonphotographic.co.uk)
12:51

Big turn out for the protest

Around 30 people sat inside the entrance to the Grafton Centre.

Around 30 people sat inside the entrance to the Grafton Centre (Image: davidjohnsonphotographic.co.uk)
12:49

XR have taken over the centre of the Grafton entrance

Environmental activists Extinction Rebellion have launched another protest inside the Grafton Centre between Next, Boots and Gail’s Bakery

Environmental activists Extinction Rebellion have launched another protest inside the Grafton Centre between Next, Boots and Gail's Bakery (Image: davidjohnsonphotographic.co.uk)
12:05

Pictures from the protest

Silent Rebellion inside the Grafton Centre.

Silent Rebellion inside the Grafton Centre (Image: Cambridge News)


XR have been protesting in Cambridge a lot over the past month

The sit in comes after a busy month of action carried out by the group across Cambridge.

Last Saturday (January 25) Extinction Rebellion launch another silent protest but this time it was in the Grand Arcade.

The day before that,(January 24), activists chained themselves to Cambridge’s ‘tent building’, the home of American oil firm Schlumberger.


On January 18, XR protesters blocked entry to the BP garage on Elizabeth Way in the longest shutdown staged in Cambridge so far, before a blockade on Milton Road during Thursday morning’s rush hour (January 23).
11:08

Today marks the sixth Silent Rebellion in Cambs

So far in Cambridge they have held five of these Silent Rebellions and this time round they are inviting the public to join them on the floor of a public space.

On the group’s Facebook page, they say: “Bring stillness to your mind and to a shopping centre. Meditate (or silently reflect) together, openly and beautifully expressing your choice to choose contentment over consumption.

“50 of you caused quite a spectacle in the Grand Arcade in last week’s 5th Silent Rebellion. We look forward to seeing you anytime between 11am and 12.30pm.”

The first one was held back in 2019 on Christs Pieces in September, then inside the Grand Arcade in November, the third was also in November but in the Grafton Centre. The most recent two Silent Rebellions were both in the Grand Arcade shopping centre in December and January of this year.
11:06

XR holding a "Silent Rebellion" inside the Grafton centre

Extinction Rebellion are set to hold a “Silent Rebellion” later on today.

They’re inviting the public for a meditation, or silent reflection or contemplation session at the Grafton Centre.


The group will set up themselves up inside the main entrance to the Grafton Centre between Next, Boots and Gail’s Bakery.

Protesters will position themselves on the floor outside the shops from 11am until 12.30pm today (Saturday February 1), carrying out what they are calling a Silent Rebellion.

Video from the last Silent Protest 
(TURN VOLUME UP LOL)

The video below shows the Silent Rebellion which took place in the Grand Arcade last week, January 25. 

Iraq: Authorities Violently Remove Protesters

Security Forces Shoot Demonstrators, Burn Tents

January 31, 2020

EXPAND
Security forces fire tear gas at protesters in Baghdad, Iraq, 

on January 27, 2020. © 2020 AP Photo/Khalid Mohammed

(Beirut) – Iraqi authorities ramped up violent tactics to quash ongoing protests across Baghdad and southern Iraq between January 25 and 27, 2020, Human Rights Watch said today. Security forces set fire to protesters’ tents, fired live ammunition, and detained protesters in Baghdad, Basra, and Nasriya. Human Rights Watch was unable to determine the extent of casualties or numbers detained.

“The burning of protester tents in city squares looks like a coordinated effort by Iraqi authorities to force peaceful protesters from public spaces,” said Belkis Wille, senior crisis and conflict researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Instead of using unjustifiable force, Baghdad authorities should meet protesters’ demands by addressing rampant corruption and improving access to basic services and jobs.”

Human Rights Watch interviewed nine protesters and three medics in the three cities.

The authorities’ campaign to end the occupation of the squares began on January 25, the day after the supporters of Moqtada al-Sadr, a prominent cleric, left the protests in the squares. Authorities launched what appeared to be a coordinated campaign to end protesters’ occupation of central squares in Baghdad, Basra, and Nasriya. Witnesses described how armed men in unmarked uniforms arrived in vehicles typically used by security forces and attacked protesters, beating and detaining people and burning their tents. Seven protesters said that in all three cities they have since returned to the squares and set up new tents.

At 3 a.m. on January 25, a convoy of military and security force vehicles belonging to the Shock Forces, a local police unit, arrived in Basra’s Bahrya Square. Three protesters who were there said that men with weapons, some with hunting rifles and some masked, beat and, in some cases, detained protesters without any justification and then burned or destroyed at least 130 tents. The three men said they did not hear the attackers issue any warnings but did hear them yelling that the protesters were “jokers” and “agents of America.” The masked men used four small bulldozers to remove the remains of some of the tents, the three protesters all said. A video posted on Facebook on January 26 showed the remains of tents in Bahrya Square.

At noon on January 25, uniformed Federal Police and other security forces wearing black, beige camouflage, and blue uniforms descended on al-Khalani Square in Baghdad, lit seven tents on fire, and fired live rounds at protesters, according to a protester who was there. The person, who had been asleep at the time, said he did not hear the attackers issue a warning. A video posted on Facebook on January 25 shows protesters in al-Khalani Square trying to extinguish fires. A medic who was present said the medical team transported 13 gunshot victims to the hospital.

Another protester said that around 8 a.m. on January 26 the security forces came back to al-Khalani Square and went to nearby Tahrir Square, some in Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) vehicles, and started dismantling concrete blocks and other obstacles that protesters had used to block off the area. He said he saw security forces in al-Khalani Square open fire with AK-47s and hunting rifles and launch tear gas cartridges at the crowd, unprovoked and without warning. “I saw them shoot two protesters in the legs, drag some of the protesters on the ground and load four into their vehicles,” he said. “I saw them set fire to seven tents in Tahrir Square.” He said the forces pulled out at 10:30 a.m., once they had control of al-Khalani Square, but came back at 12:30 p.m. after protesters had returned and again used tear gas and live fire to disperse the crowd.

At 1 a.m. on January 27, armed men opened fire on crowds and set tents on fire in Haboby Square in Nasriya, two protesters said. One said he waited in his tent through 10 minutes of gunfire, then emerged and saw tents around him alight. He said he saw gunfire injure four people and found a protester dead from a gunshot wound in one of the tents that had not burned.

The other protester said he saw the security forces fire their weapons at tents with gas cylinders inside for heating, which burst into flames. Videos posted to a news website appear to show burning tents in Haboby Square on January 27 and a convoy of vehicles used by security forces driving away. Two of the vehicles, both pickup trucks, appear to have armed uniformed men in the back, and gunfire can be heard in the area.

The Iraqi authorities should investigate every death at the hands of security forces with the help of international experts if necessary, Human Rights Watch said. Such investigations should be prompt, impartial, and independent, and lead to the prosecution of anyone found to have broken the law governing use of force, including commanders.

International standards provide that law enforcement officers may only intentionally make lethal use of firearms when strictly unavoidable to protect life.

Given that security forces have killed hundreds of people, many apparently unlawfully, since protests erupted in October 2019, countries that provide military and law enforcement training and support to Iraq, including the United States, United Kingdom, and Iran should end such assistance until Iraqi authorities take effective action to stop all unlawful killings and hold those responsible to account. The United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva should hold a special session into the killings of protesters in Iraq.

“Protesters have the right to peacefully occupy public spaces and make demands of the government,” Wille said. “The last few days show the grave consequences that can follow when the government is not willing to respect that right.”

According to the UN, since protests began on October 1, 2019, at least 467 protesters have been killed and over 9,000 have been wounded. According to the Iraq High Commission for Human Rights, security forces have arrested at least 2,633 others, most of whom were promptly released.

The commission said that between January 20 and 22, security forces in Baghdad, Basra, Diyala, Dhi Qar, and Karbala have killed at least 10 protesters, wounded another 127, and detained 88. The commission said that 24 security forces have also been injured.

Events of January 19 to 22, 2020

On January 13, protesters in several southern cities demanded that by January 20 the government take clear steps to address some of their demands, including reform of the electoral law and early elections. The nine protesters Human Rights Watch interviewed in Baghdad, Basra, and Nasriya said that they and others had blocked main roads in those cities with burning tires on January 19. In response, they said, security forces fired live ammunition and tear gas cartridges, and protesters threw stones and Molotov cocktails.

A protester in Baghdad said that after protesters blocked roads on January 19, anti-riot police fired tear gas cartridges directly at protesters without warning. “My friend was filming about 100 meters away when a tear gas cartridge hit him right in the head,” he said. “He died.” The protesters responded by throwing Molotov cocktails and rocks at the police, he said.

The protester said that on January 20, he saw Federal Police on Mohammed al-Qasim highway in Baghdad firing at protesters with live rounds and beating some. He said that he saw the police shoot one of his friends in the leg. He and a medic who was there said that security forces on the highway were also using tear gas and stun grenades against protesters, who responded by throwing rocks and Molotov cocktails. The medic said that his team treated at least 60 protesters who were injured by metal fragments from stun grenades and bullets or choking from tear gas. He said six protesters died from gunshot wounds to the head or neck. A video posted on Facebook on January 22 appeared to show SWAT forces beating protesters on the highway in Baghdad on January 20.

Two Basra protesters said that on January 20, masked armed men arrested five protesters on the streets near Bahrya Square, which protesters had occupied since October. One protester said about 400 protesters started chanting for their release outside the local police headquarters and “all of [the] sudden the gates opened and about 60 police started beating us with wooden sticks.” The two protesters said they saw police arrest at least 10 protesters as the police chased the crowds, beating some.

On January 21, 1 of the protesters said he saw security forces open fire on a crowd of about 200 protesters next to Bahrya Square, some of whom were lighting tires and blocking a road. He saw one protester shot in the back as he was running from security forces. “They put him in their vehicle and drove him away, and arrested another four men who they dragged along the ground and beat,” he said. Both protesters said that after the security forces left the area at night, the protesters saw an SUV pull up and the people inside open fire on protesters, killing a female medic and wounding seven protesters.

---30---

Enigma: The anatomy of Israel’s intelligence failure almost 45 years ago



THE YOM KIPPUR WAR OF 1973 AND THE GOLAN HEIGHTS WAR 1982

A TALE OF HUBRIS AND RACISM, SAVING VICTORY FROM THE JAWS OF DEFEAT 

THIS IS AN EXCERPT

LONG READ FEATURE ARTICLE FROM 2017
YOU MIGHT WANT TO 'PRINT' IT AND SAVE IT
AS A PDF TO READ LATER, IT IS 33 PAGES LONG



The critical meeting on the 3rd took place at the prime minister’s residence in Jerusalem. The Head of Research, Aryeh Shalev, represented the DMI position, as General Zeira was ill. The Mossad director was not invited. Shalev explained the Egyptian build-up as an exercise, reminded the prime minister that the DMI had been right in May, and again judged the risk of war as “low.” The Syrians were admittedly more threatening, but there had been an air clash over the Mediterranean on September 13 in which 13 Syrian Mig-21’s were shot down for only one IAF loss; the DMI presumed Syria’s build up was more related to fears of an Israeli attack after the clash than anything else. IAF imagery of the Golan presented a frightening picture, especially compared to the May war scare. Now 850 tanks were forward deployed (compared to only 250 six months before) and 31 SAM batteries were deployed (compared to 2 in May). But Shalev argued there was no cause for alarm, it was just Syrian posturing. As usual, Syria was not given as much attention as Egypt. At the end of the meeting, the prime minister shook Shalev’s hand and thanked him for calming her down. No full cabinet meeting was scheduled until after Yom Kippur on Sunday, the 7th of October.[29]

Meanwhile, in Damascus the Egyptian War Minister met secretly with his counterparts and then with President Assad. According to the account of Nasser’s journalist-confidant after the war, Muhammad Heikal, they finalized October 6 as D-Day and agreed that H-Hour would be 1400. This was a compromise between the two allies; Syria wanted an earlier attack and Egypt one closer to dusk. Egyptian war plans had always preferred an attack at 1800 so that night would cover much of the crossing of equipment to reinforce the bridgehead.[30] October 6 was also Assad’s 43rd birthday.[31]

The next day, October 4, a larger security meeting in the IDF was given the same appraisal. No mobilization of the IDF was ordered. Sadat and Assad, meanwhile, were informing the Soviet ambassadors in Cairo and Damascus that war was imminent, but did not provide the exact D-Day.[32] Assad was the more forthcoming and informative. On the 5th, Soviet transport aircraft—including giant AN-22s—began evacuating the dependents of Soviet diplomats and advisors from Egypt and Syria. Sadat would later bitterly complain that the Soviet evacuation betrayed a “total lack of confidence in us and our fighting ability.”[33]

The Russian evacuation should have been the final straw that convinced the DMI that war was imminent. There was no reason to evacuate from Egypt if Tahrir was really only an exercise. The Israelis even intercepted a phone call involving the Iraqi ambassador in Moscow, who was close to the Soviet leadership, in which he reported that the Soviets were evacuating because they expected an imminent Egyptian-Syrian attack on Israel.[34] The evacuation did raise some concerns in the IDF’s headquarters in Tel Aviv but the Soviet move did not prompt a change in the DMI estimate. The rest of the 7th Armored Brigade was sent to the Golan, but a long, 43-paragraph appraisal by the DMI concluded it was really all an exercise and there was “low probability” for war. Later in the day General Zeira told Dayan “I don’t think we are going to war.”[35]

That morning, October 5, at 0230 in Tel Aviv, the Source called the Mossad station in London. Again, he used the code word for war. Alerted immediately, Mossad chief Zvi Zamir took a morning first flight to London. Zamir was later severely criticized by the post-war investigation for not immediately flying to London and for going back to sleep for a couple of hours.[36] Ashraf Marwan was in Paris when he alerted the Mossad station in London. He didn’t know exactly when the war was to start, but he made an educated guess. A friend had told him that Egyptair, the national airline, was moving all of its aircraft from Cairo to Libya on October 5. Marwan knew from the war plans that an attack would follow this within 24 hours. According to the war plan H-Hour would be at 6pm. He told Zamir this late on the evening of the 5th. The Mossad chief called home at 0340 in Israel, where it was now October 6—Yom Kippur—and alerted his staff. War was expected to start at 6pm that day. It was not five days advance warning.[37] 
Egyptian Armed Forces crossing the eastern bank of the Suez Canal during October war.

Dayan was briefed on the new Mossad information just before 6am. He told the IDF command not to order a general mobilization on the basis of the Source’s news but to call up some reservists and evacuate children from the Golan Heights settlements. At a cabinet meeting at 9am, the prime minister ordered a larger call-up and ruled out a preemptive air strike. She met with the American ambassador after the cabinet meeting and told him war was imminent, and asked that Secretary of State Henry Kissinger tell the Russians immediately to call off the Arabs. Kissinger was awakened in his room at the Waldorf Astoria to the news war was imminent. Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger was informed minutes later. Schlesinger recalled later the outbreak of war came “almost wholly as a surprise. We really had all the clues we needed but all these indicators were dismissed as Arab hyperbole. The Israeli mind set was that the Arabs would not attack until they had air superiority. The U.S. mind set was the Israelis know best.”[38]
Egyptian vehicles crossing the Suez Canal on October 7, 1973,
 during the Yom Kippur War.

EXPLAINING THE MEHDAL

The war cost Israel 2,656 dead and 7,250 wounded. 300 of the 500 Israeli tanks on the Canal and Golan were destroyed in the first days of the war. The intelligence mistake was enormous and cost Zeira his job. The Agranat Commission that investigated the blunder concluded that a “doctrinaire adherence to the konzeptziya” was at the root of the problem. The generals who were involved in the disaster would spend the rest of their lives arguing over whose fault it was. Zeira came to blame the Mossad for running what he concluded was a double agent that gave Israel the wrong concept. Zamir sued Zeira for slander and for leaking the name of an intelligence asset.

Any professional intelligence officer will naturally be inclined to sympathize with the Israeli intelligence community in 1973. I have worked with the Israelis and know many of the individuals in this story. Making sense of incomplete data is hard; making clear estimates under enormous time pressure about life and death situations is very hard. Everything always looks clear after the fact, anyone can connect the dots after the game is over. The Israelis were determined not to be worst-case alarmists and cry wolf every time the skies darkened. But even with all the sympathy of one professional for another, the Israeli intelligence failure in 1973 is remarkable. They knew so much and yet came to the worst estimate.

The problem was indeed rooted in the concept and the intelligence community’s slavish commitment to its interpretation of all data collected about the enemy and his intentions. As Zamir put it: “[W]e simply did not feel them capable of war.”[39] Even with amazing intelligence collection successes and the warning from Hussein, the intelligence community refused to be budged from its line of analysis. It had been proven right in the past and was supremely confident it was right again. Even when some more junior officers questioned the logic, like the Jordan desk officer, they were ignored. As a future head of analysis in the DMI Ephraim Kam has argued, our “error began with a basic concept that the Arabs would not attack during the next two to three years, and every new development was adopted to this concept.”[40]

But it was more than the concept that was in error. The Israeli intelligence community and the Israeli policy community had created a small and intimate feedback loop in which their common assumptions about the enemy were never challenged. Dayan, a military hero of epic proportions, shared the fundamental assumption that the Arabs were incompetent with his intelligence advisers. Since the prime minister relied on her generals entirely on military issues, she shared it as well. Again, to quote Kam: “[I]n estimating the enemy’s behavior the intelligence community is not alone, it got plenty of feedback from outside. Once a national consensus about the opponent’s behavior becomes settled, it is very hard to dislodge.”[41]

The meetings held in the weeks from Hussein’s warning of war to the attack itself illustrate the problem. The intelligence community adhered to its concept and interpreted the data collected to fit inside the box. The policy consumer of the intelligence estimate did not challenge the analysis, but rather reinforced it. “The result is feedback: the decisionmakers contribute to the creation of a climate of opinion that influences the intelligence process, while intelligence provides information that supports the decisionmakers’ assessment. Decisionmakers influence the analytical process as well. Analysts may over-emphasize information that supports existing policy.”[42]

As a small country, the Israeli national security bureaucracy is relatively small and lean. This was certainly true in 1973. The feedback loop was a fairly small one, and it would have been very difficult for someone in the establishment to challenge the consensus successfully. With the national command authority absent for much of the critical phase of the crisis, the problem was exacerbated.

The Americans proved to be no help either. They too were mesmerized by the concept. Richard Helms had served as director of Central Intelligence since before the 1967 war to just before the 1973 war. In 1967 he had rightly predicted Israel’s stunning victory. He told President Richard Nixon in 1973 that the IDF “will be able to beat each and every one of its enemies and all together for the next five years. Damn it, the Israelis are really so much better off with what they have than their pitiful and stupid neighbors, who cannot do a thing without the Russians.”[43] Rather than a second set of eyes on the problem and a check on Israeli assumptions, the American intelligence community became an amen chorus for Israeli errors.
President Richard Nixon, Vice President Gerald Ford, Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and White House Chief of Staff Alexander Haig in Oval Office. Source: Wikimedia Commons.

Dayan was probably the most surprised of all and he almost immediately went into a deep depression from the shock of the disaster. By late on October 7 he was “close to a mental breakdown” and was speaking of the fall of the Third Temple. He ordered the commander of the IAF to put all of its resources into fighting Syria and said: “[T]he Third Temple is in danger. If the air force does not transfer all its power to block the Syrians, Syrian tanks will enter Israel soon.”[44] He ordered an alert of the Israeli nuclear deterrent. Israel’s medium-range Jericho missiles, developed with French assistance in the 1960s, were ordered on alert and deployed where American satellites could see them at their base at Beit Zecharia near Jerusalem. Normally the Jericho’s were hidden from American intelligence eyes. William Quandt, who served in the White House, recalled later: “[W]e did not know what kind of warheads the Jericho’s had but it did not make much sense to me that they would be equipped with conventional ordinance.” The tide of war soon shifted to Israel’s advantage, thankfully and Dayan ordered the missiles back into their concrete dugouts.[45] By the end of the war, Dayan was increasingly ignored by the prime minister—she did not fire him, but she had lost confidence in him.

The Agranat Commission recommended some organizational changes to prevent another disaster. This is always the default position of bureaucracies when intelligence fails: Change the organizational flow chart, not the menu itself. In particular, the commission recommended that the Mossad establish an analytical capability itself to challenge the military intelligence assessments, and that the Foreign Ministry significantly build up its research and analysis wing to add a third voice to the debate. The theory was that having three organizations each independently study the data and make estimates would diminish the chance of the concept going unchallenged.

LEBANON 1982, FAILURE REDUX

It did not work out that way. Less than a decade later, Israel suffered another major intelligence debacle when it invaded Lebanon. Once again, a consensus was formed between the intelligence and policy communities that a short war in Lebanon against the Palestinian resistance movement led by Yasser Arafat could change the strategic balance in the region in Israel’s favor. The hero of the 1973 war and now Defense Minister Ariel Sharon was the chief proponent of the new concept, but many others supported him. Sharon had been one of the most firm believers in the 1973 concept, believing Egypt would face “total destruction” and “a horrible, horrible cost” if it went to war then.[46] Now, he was the architect of a new concept, remaking the Middle East via a war in Lebanon. Using a provocation—an Iraqi terror attack in London on the Israeli ambassador—Israel invaded Lebanon in June 1982.[47] 
 
Israeli troops in south Lebanon (1982). Source: Wikimedia Commons.

A critical ingredient in the new concept was the assumption that the majority of the population in Lebanon would welcome Israel as it defeated the Palestinians and their Syrian allies. The Maronite Christian minority in Lebanon would actively assist the Israelis against the Palestinians and the Syrians. The Sunni Muslim community was allegedly tired of Palestinian and Syrian hegemony and would be neutral. The largest demographic group in the country, the Shiite Muslims, was ignored. They were not politically active and not on the new Israeli concept’s list of key actors. This was a grave error. Why did it occur? Why was Israeli intelligence, just nine years after the Yom Kippur war, again to fail to understand the dynamics of another war?

In Lebanon in 1982, the Israeli intelligence community relied heavily on its Christian ally, the Lebanese Forces, for intelligence about the complexities of Lebanese politics. For decades, Israel’s concern in Lebanon had been the Palestinian terrorist organizations and the Syrian occupation army, while Lebanese politics and society were not a priority. For understanding this arena, the Israelis turned to the Lebanese Forces.

Bashir Jumayyil was the leader of the Lebanese Forces in the early 1980s. The son of the founder of the oldest Christian party, the Phalange, Bashir was an activist who despised the Palestinians, Syrians, and virtually all Muslims. He conspired with Sharon to get himself elected president of Lebanon after the Israeli invasion in June 1982 and promised Israel he would sign a peace treaty, drive out the Palestinians, and Syrians and create a reliable northern ally for Israel.

Responsibility for dealing with the Phalangists, as they were popularly known in Israel, rested with the Mossad as a covert operation. The links between the Mossad and the Christians went back many years, but had only really blossomed after the Lebanese civil war began in 1975. Mossad officers frequently visited the Phalange headquarters in East Beirut, and Phalangists were frequent visitors to Israel. Arms and training flowed into the Lebanese Forces militia from Israel.

Since the Mossad dealt directly with the Phalangists, it became the expert on both the Christians in particular and Lebanon in general. But the Mossad found it difficult to maintain its analytic objectivity while also being the operational interlocutor with the Christians. It became their advocate as well as handler. As the Kahan Commission reported, after the war had culminated in a Phalangist massacre of innocent Palestinian women and children in September 1982:

“the Mossad was the organization that actually handled the relations between the Phalangists and Israel, and its representatives maintained close contacts with the Phalangist leadership. The Mossad, to a not inconsiderable extent under the influence of constant and close relations with the Phalangist elite, felt positively about strengthening relations with that organization.”[48]

The then-head of the Mossad, Nahum Admoni, put it succinctly: “[T]he Mossad tried to the best of its ability to present and approach the subject (of intelligence on Lebanon) as objectively as possible; but since it was in charge of the contacts, I accept as an assumption that subjective and not only objective relations also emerged.”[49] The key intelligence collector and analyst on Lebanon, the Mossad, became too often the advocate of Phalangist assessments. Since Sharon wanted to hear that his concept for change in Lebanon would work, the policy and intelligence feedback loop became again a self-fulfilling, closed world.

Military intelligence of course also collected and analyzed intelligence on Lebanon as well, but its leadership was reluctant to challenge the Mossad’s primacy. When Jumayyil was assassinated on September 14, 1982, the IDF entered into Muslim West Beirut. Phalangist fighters were then sent into two Palestinian refugee camps, Sabra and Shatilla, where they proceeded to massacre the inhabitants. The Kahan Commission, which investigated the incident, concluded that the director of military intelligence at the time, Major General Yehoshua Saguy, “stepped aside” from his responsibility to assess the likelihood of a Phalangist massacre because he did not want to clash with Sharon and the Mossad on the Christians propensity for extreme violence. Consequently, the commission recommended he be removed from his command. Ironically, because Admoni had only taken command of the Mossad two days before the assassination, the Kahan Commission absolved him of responsibility and he remained Director until 1989.[50] It did fault the Mossad as an institution for adhering to the “conception” and for the “view prevalent in the Mossad that the Phalangists were a trustworthy element” despite their long track record of extremist violence against Palestinian civilians.