11903.fb2 ГУЛаг Палестины - читать онлайн бесплатно полную версию книги . Страница 103

ГУЛаг Палестины - читать онлайн бесплатно полную версию книги . Страница 103

Supplements), and others. My lawyer's notes were written on top of them, what you can see on one of the copies. It

means that I have rights to mention them now because by time of our refugee hearings they were accessible for the

commissioners because were part of my immigration file.

1

1.1. In this document, I am going to explain, prove and show, why and how all my family members, and I, would face

risk to life, extreme sanctions and inhuman treatment not just because of the danger for us in general, but also

because of the refugee board members' actions.

Please, do not make a final decision in my case without studying all supporting documents, because they content the

main argumentation about this risk.

1.2. This risk of return to Israel has been increased during our residency in Canada because of the next actions of

IRB members.

A). IRB, assigned to our file, contacted Israel and informed Israelis about our refugee claim in Canada (see Group of

documents # 4, Document # 3, p.p. 1,2,3; Document # 1, page 1, paragraph # 3, point 5), also p.2, point

11), also p.3, point 8); and also Supplements, Documents # 6, 7). That would increase the possibility of

vengeance to us from Israeli authorities.

B). Even if a definite information - that the embassy of Israel in Canada could already know about the content of our

immigration file - is wrong, sooner or later they would know it. Trying to find defense and justice, I have submitted a

short description of our immigration hearings and of the final IRB' negative decision to hundreds of human rights

organizations and to thousands of other destinations. I made them available on Internet for the same purposes. So,

Israelis know them, too, anyway.

C). In the same time the IRB commissioners and the immigration officer instead of defining whether or not we could

face persecutions in Israel (as we claimed), concentrated on accusing us as if it was a criminal court. They

characterized me as an exaggerator and defamator, dangerous (they do not use this word but it is the only

characteristic of what they meant) to the state of Israel* (see commentaries in the end of this part). Their insinuations that I turned to innumerous places in Israel, including human rights organizations, MP's, police, Amnesty International (see the list of them in Supplements, Document # 8; see also copies of documentary proof of my appeals to

various organizations in Supplements, Documents # 9,10,11,12) not because I looked for protection but to

"spread slender about Israel"** (see comments 2 at the end of that part), seem absurd and outraged only in Canada, but not in Israel! Even here (in Canada) they were used as an excuse to deny our refugee claim, and the negative decision

was logically presented as a "punishment" for "slander" and "exaggerations" (see Document #5, p. 1; 2 last

paragraphs on the bottom of the page, p.2, paragraphs 1, 2). Israeli authorities would consider Montreal's

"immigration court's" (IRB) decision to define us as enemies of Israel and dangerous exaggerators, as a leading

order (not just an excuse) to persecute us. As a Jew and, probably, an Israeli, the immigration officer, Mrs. Malka,

expressed her almost open hatred and partiality towards my personality in such tones and colors, which could

perfectly correspond to the manners and mentality of Israelis. Their most sensitive feelings would be touched by her

words, and that would make my destiny even more miserable if I would be removed to Israel (please, read the

whole Group of Documents #4, and Document # 5). She also expressed open threats, including a threat to

open a criminal procedure against me... (see Group of Documents # 4).

D). By their attitude, the commissioners during the hearings and in the negative decision somehow separated me

from other members of my family. They almost openly let know that my family suffering and refused the status only

because of my political views. That could provoke Israelis to separate me from my family or even take away our

children (I know several precedents). Rejection of my refugee claim because of my attitude towards the state of Israel

(in other words, my political views) is the main topic of the negative decision. That would encourage Israelis to do just

anything to me (if Canadian court did what it did, why should they wait?): to imprison me, place to a mental hospital, or kill. I am absolutely sure that within days or weeks I could be imprisoned in Israel and, probably, killed in custody not just because of objective factors, but also because of what the commissioners' did.

E). The political situation in Israel has been changed, too, since we left, to the worse. I present documents (see

Supplements, Document # 19), which shows that the present extremist government is not ready to maintain just

any tolerance. This is why the commissioners' actions would lead to more severe consequences if we would be

removed back to Israel. By the time of the hearings these changes already took place, and the commissioners had to

know pretty good about that...

F). Policemen in Israel could still remember my wife's, mother's, and my own complains; I also turned to the Ministry

of Police and Ministry of Internal Affairs. Now, - when in their brief description of my refugee claim members of IRB

severely distorted my claim (see Document #5, page 2, Comments), - how could we turn for defense in Israel any

more? The IRB members' action made us completely insecure and unprotected in Israel (if removed there). [Since