ГУЛаг Палестины
Шрифт:
but also other material proofs like business card with the name and telephone number of the person, who contacted
me, and so on. (Supplements, Document # 43).
Here are just several examples of how important were the things, which the IRB did not let me to tell. I could give more examples of the most vital for the valuation of my
case things, which description was blocked by the IRB. They used aggressive behavior, psychological pressure, administrative orders, and even threats for
preventing me from the particular things' description. In the same time, these things might be critical for the question of not just mine, but all family members' life or
death!
One of the most significant indications that the danger to my life always exists in Israel is that Israeli police abused me.
IRB members could speak non-stop about how it was not typical, but they could not deny the fact of abuse itself. In
Israel, where tortures by police or army are legal (see Supplements, Documents # 44), army or police could
always torture and kill me or any other member of my family. In context of all that I described and explained above
police action against me does not looks occasional. To show how police in Israel is dangerous for innocent
unprotected people I support this paragraph by several documents (see Documents # 45, 46, 47).
Please, believe me that I am not exaggerating the risk to my life. I have enough experience to detect it as real: and it
is real!
1.4.
Our removal from Canada back to Israel could be an extreme sanction in itself. Because what happened
in 1991 was not our freewill immigration to Israel but a forcible deportation to Israel executed by both
communist and Israeli authorities (see Document #2). Our removal to a country we do not belong to and
which citizenship was thrust on us against our free will is immoral and inhuman. To extradite us to Israel
means to return us back to captivity.
During more then 3 years I was refused a special permission, which is required for immigrants, to leave Israel (listen
to my 1-st hearing's recording). In supported documents I explain why I did not mention that in my refugee claim but
only during the hearings (see p.1 of this Document). We quit Israel with such extreme difficulties that we never
could leave it any more if removed there, and could not fly persecutions any more. We, adults, and even our children
could stay in captivity there to the rest of our lives!
If we would be removed back to Israel extreme and most vulnerable sanctions could be adopted against us there.
Such sanctions not just highly expected, but are obvious since Israeli authorities already practiced extreme
administrative pressure on us in 1991-1994. There were next administrative sanctions.
A). a) Refusal to give my wife, and me permission to work in our professions. b) Refusal to give me an employment
authorization at all after 1992.
1. We were not given an appropriate language course as all fresh immigrants.
2. The Ministry of Culture and Education refused to make equivalents of my wife's, and mine diplomas, when they
had to do that automatically according to Israeli rules. I have already presented all material evidences to the
Immigration Board, and the board did not express any doubt in these documents authenticity. That fact was also
mentioned during our immigration hearings.
3. Without these equivalents, we were not legitimate for a permission to work in our professions, as well as for the
most of the professional courses available.
4. I was legitimate to enter only one course - "Talpiot", - which was denied me. The reason of the denial was not
given.
My protests and demands to provide me with a reason of the denial were lost without notice. Maitre Stanley Levin, the
only Israeli lawyer who agreed to defend me in Israel, composed a letter to the Minister of Culture and Education Mr.
Amnon Rubinshtein. Maitre S.Levin's letter and Mr. A. Rubinshtein's response were presented to the IRB (see
Documents # 48 in Supplements). That topic was widely discussed during my immigration hearings; the
Immigration Board expressed no doubts that this conflict took place in reality. In the same time the commissioners did
attempts to misrepresent this event and to place it in dependence of mentioned in my wife's Israeli eternal passport
nationality. Maitre Dore, who replaced my main lawyer during the time of the hearings, did a mistake, allowing the
commissioners to lead him in that question. In reality, I would reject "Talpiot's" administration demands to show my
wife's passport-related nationality even if it was marked as "Jewish": because for the people like me such a demand
was disgracing and racist. And I do not think that this little incident was the real reason of the refusal. But I could not
name the "reason" because the term "political persecutions" is too abstract for the commissioners.
5. The Ministry's of Labor governmental Labor Exchange refused to register me as unemployed after the first
accommodative trial period in Israel. Israeli regulations by then put some restrictions on employers to employ a
person who was not registered by the governmental labor exchange. In reality, it was equal to a refusal of an