ГУЛаг Палестины

the immigration board in our cases, is an Israeli. Because of some reasons we'd like not to present the evidences for that. But this paragraph can play an

informative role only. We have no pretensions to demand you to believe in that. From the other hand if the immigration officer is an Israeli (it can be

confirmed, if somebody wants to find out) and the patriot of Israel (the last is too clear), she has no moral and - may be - legal rights to judge in refugees'

from Israel cases.8)When G.'s came to Montreal they gave G.'s wife's birth certificate and it's legal translation to our lawyer. Dispute the submission of that

legal translation the lawyer's translator did her own translation. Now we discovered that she sabotaged ("refused") to translate his wife's parents' nationality.

There is a clear connection between that sabotage and the immigration officer's tactics in that issue. The immigration court decision came to us at the 14 of

December, 1996. The denial of our claim for a refugee status doesn't reflects what really happened during our immigration hearings and has almost no

connection with our claim. It is a masterpiece of rhetoric and profanation. This document is a next proof that an only decisive voice in our case was the voice

of the immigration officer. She was a real judge - and the official judges were just mutes. The text of "their" negative decision reflects her style and based on

her words exclusively: Her declarations she made during our hearings are reflected in this document pretty good. But this document ignore our answers

completely: As if we kept silence all the time. When in reality some of our counterarguments completely discredited her insinuations. Nothing what the judges

said during our immigration hearing is reflected in the immigration board decision, what means that the decision to deny our claim was made by the

immigration officer only (without the judges) when according to the rules she has no decisive voice but only a consultative voice. The denial's text is much the

declaration about Israel then a statement of an immigration committee. It based on an acsioma that Israel is a democratic state (society). Such a declaration

lays beyond the juridical matter: Because there is not in jurisdiction of an immigration board to decide which state is a democracy and which is not. This is a

privilege of an academic institution but not of an executive board. Then it is an act of injustice to declare that Israel is a democracy in an imperative manner

giving the refugee claimants no possibility to present their view and their counterarguments. It is clear from what was discussed during our immigration

hearings that Israel has almost nothing in common with democracy. A permission to leave the country, an indication of nationality and the country of origin in

special enternal passports, a supremacy of the religious laws over the civil code, a right for a military committee to decide who is a single son and who's not,

an imprisonment for months without an official accusation: All these and hundreds of other Israeli laws are suitable may be for a mental hospital - but not for a

"democratic society". An opinion expressed by the document that we should not escape to Canada but should seek a help in Israel also has nothing what to

do with the reality. We did everything to defend ourselves in Israel, and G. as a journalist and the human righta activist did everything that was possible to

help us.He presented tenth of receipts of his complains to various ministries and organizations including the Ministry of Police, the Ministry of internal affairs

and police, which were unanswered, to the immigration committee. The sad truth is that the committee just ignores everything. And recognize only the

ungrounded Israel's declarations. And the immigration officer - a person who sends faxes to Israeli embassy, obtains documents there;in other words who's

in tight connection with Israelis - is the only person who has a decidable voice in the refugees from Israel cases... Isn't that sad?!

We can not go back to Israel under no condition, because

1) my husband and my son may be arrested by the militaries and imprisoned. I expressed my grounded fears about that during the hearings and I can widen

them now. 2) How can we go back to Israel if the immigration officer informed the Israelis about our refugee claim? In Israel where the ideology and the

patriotic education play a very important role we will be considered as "traitors" and will be persecuted for that, too. 3) Persecutions against us in Israel were

so strong that if we would be send back to Israel we will die. 4) After receiving so called "21-st military profile" my son has no future in Israel: Because in

Israel people who are given that "profile" can not study, and nobody will employ my son with such a "profile". 5) After all the persecutions we faced in Israel

we feel fear - and we are afraid to go back; our fear, our psychological tremor towards Israel are so strong that there is impossible for us to live in Israel any

more. In the name of God, in the name of Justice - HELP US!!!

CONCLUSIONS: our 2 immigration hearings (as well as hearings in G. case) have nothing in common with any legal procedure. They rather remine of an

incuisition court or a secret political tribunal. This tribunal was arranged to punish us for flieding Israel and G.
– for his ideological views - not to decide

whether or not our (ours and G. family's) claim for a refugee status is justified. It was used for the political purposes: To "show" how just any information

about human rights violations in Israel which not concerns Arabs can be calmed down - and to express a huge pro-Israel propaganda. They made clear that

they treat our escape from Israel as a mutiny and will never admit the very fact that we are in Canada, in Quebec, not in Israel. Their words, their behavior

everything - was meant to show us that we could only deserve to be treated according to the Canadian rules after getting a refugee status. Before that we