ГУЛаг Палестины
Шрифт:
that case but police never responded [*12].
P.3. Paragraphs 1-2. In context of that the demander together with his family including his mother came to ask a refugee status in Canada
[*13].
Paragraph 3. After seeing that declaration, studying their lawyer's arguments and other material we came to a conclusion that demanders
are not refugees. We came to that conclusion because of the next reasons:
Paragraphs 4-6. Demanders claim that they flied Israel for seeking an asylum and because of a number of incidents, which victims they
became. But the tribunal is disagree with that because [...] they all came to Israel according to Israeli authorities permission and acceptation,
and also because they took an advantage from benefits of a free transportation to Israel, Israeli citizenship, a certain amount of money for
settlement, a free language course, and other benefits. They also might use other help because we have the documentation indicated that
the population in Israel gives material help to newcomers.
P.4. Paragraphs 2-5. It is possible that during their life in Israel they faced some difficulties because some individual ultra-religious feel that
their rights are violated because of the presence of 2 secular adults who refuse to practice their religion. But there are no evidences that
Russians are persecuted because of their religion, nationality, or because they are mixed couples or because they express anti fascist
views as pretend the demander.
In result we were convinced that the demanders are [dangerous for their state] exaggerators who painted a picture of their state as a state
of slavery, injustice, where Russians are bitten if they do not work quickly enough, where Russian children are victims of mockery
committing by theirs classmates and teachers, and where Russian women are victims of sexual harassment. And that all is going on
without any possibility to obtain a protection from the state.
As a result of that the demanders turned to police in several occasions without success, to innumerous organizations, human rights groups
and to Amnesty International, composed letters to members of parliament and contacted more then one lawyer without getting any
protection from the state.
It is incongruous to that documentation about Israel, which we have chosen. This documentation present Israel as a democratic society,
maintaining a justified juridical system in favor of the citizen. Police never have any discriminatory behavior towards Russian or Arabs.
P..5. Paragraphs 1-5. Multiple human right organizations are also presented in Israel, both local and international.
Documentation, which we present, we consider as completely reliable, when the demanders' documentation we consider as unbelievable.
The tribunal ignored demanders' medical and other certificates and documents because we have found that their documents show nothing
in particular.
COMMENTS 1. Children age is given incorrectly. Probably, because our children were younger, and that could give us more sympathy. 2. It
is false. Our children were abused during the celebration as well as in cause of that celebration (they were not allowed to a "suka" and were
kept in a dark room - because they are "Russians"). It is clear from our declaration. 3. It is false. They presented the event as if our children
were abused not by the teacher but by the children during the celebration, when in reality it is the teacher who abused them. 4. They
combine two different event into one what is juridicaly incorrect. 5. Without a notice that my wife could not find a job because she was
considered as Russian that sentence is incorrect. 6. It is false. She was not sexually abused. But she was beaten because she refused to
obey the sexual pretensions of an Israeli. It is also false because it happened not at her first working place but when she became a cleaner.
7. It is false. Complains to Amnesty International gave a result. In result of them Israeli government let us leave the country. 7-a. It is a
direct distortion. First, the discussion about fascism arose during our immigration hearings but does not reflected in our declaration. On the
other hand, I never claimed that I was persecuted in Israel solemnly because of denouncing fascism. The discussion about fascism was
related to my article and to a commentary to it made by the editors of that newspaper. They wrote that I have to be punished for my views,
that my works have to be destroyed and expressed their aggression towards my poor person. 8. It is false. Two different events, which
happened in different years, are confused together here. They combined the event consciously in a kind of nonsense: to make all our
declaration non-reliable. 9. It is false. It is the second from the above-mentioned events, it mixed with the previous in a strange way. It is
absolutely contradictory with what may be found in the declaration. 10. We gave a precise month. 11. It is false. A huge box, which was
released to hit our front door (to the entrance to our apartment, and not to my mother's door - as the tribunal wrote) from the above flour,
has damaged our door. It was breached through. The tribunal presents the events as if there were no damages. They claim that in a
non-justified wave of panic my mother turned to police, and - naturally - was refused. They try to present us as exaggerators. 12. My mother
did not compose her letter to police herself. Other people assisted her. 13. It is false, because that paragraph may be interpreted as if we