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
the context of their negative decision is already known to Israeli authorities].
* The negative decision mentioned the paragraph about slavery in my refugee claim (which Mrs. Broder inserted) in ignorance of: 1) my words that the translator distorted my statement, 2) my explanation that this paragraph correspond to a specific tendency in Israel called "kablanut", 3) two newspaper articles, which described "kablanut" and openly denounced it as slavery. (See these articles in Supplements, Doc. #81). An affidavit about the event, on which "my" statement about slavery was based, was given to me in Israel by Lev Ginsburg (see Supplements, Doc.82). We became victims of extreme generalization, when submitted by partial Israelis "affidavits" were respected more then even human life - and thousands of affidavits, articles and other documents provided by another side were totally ignored. Documents, which demonstrated non-competence and partiality and were provided by the members of Israeli government
(Mr. A. Charanski), its institutions (Israeli embassy) or committed to Israeli government fundraisers (Dr. Livny) were presented as only reliable and "independent"!
** After expressed by IRB members' insinuations that I turned to various organizations and institutions in Israel not for protection but to "spread slander" I could have no protection in Israel any more if removed there. IRB's insinuation is a verdict for non-protection in the state of Israel! How could we go back there now?!
CHILDREN.
During our refugee hearings, the commissioners had chances to observe our children.
They could not ignore that the children are deeply suppressed and still not in norm.
Because of abuses and insults, both Ina and Marta had nervous tics and hyper kineses. It stopped only about one
year ago. We possess a videocassette as a proof that during the period of refugee hearings the children still had
impulsive face muscles' contractions and other visual neurological disorders.
We also had a psychological evaluation at this point concerning Ina.
From observing our children, the commissioners could understand that because the children are shy and timid they
could be abused or even killed by Israeli children. That would bring additional danger to their lives. Such children as
ours have always much more chances to be abused or even killed in the countries with the dominated "east temper".
Because in spite of the time, which passed since we came from Israel to Canada, both Ina and Marta visually reacted
to the discussion about their life in Israel with horror and fear, the commissioners had a chance to see how deep the
psychological trauma affected the children and also how easy such children could become targets for abuses in
Israel.
The description of multiple assaults of our children were also ignored by the commissioners. The IBR members also
probably knew that by the time of our hearings Israeli authorities could take children away from Christian, atheist,
mixed, or non-traditional Jewish families...
In the text of their negative decision the IRB members seriously distorted some paragraphs of our refugee claim,
which described multiple abuses against our children.
Through all mentioned above (active or passive) actions, the IRB members had shown themselves as people with no
mercy, open to cruelty and ready to commit abuses themselves. If they had no attention or mercy even towards the
children, who then they are and how could such people make a decision in our case?!
WIFE.
The commissioners had also a chance to observe my wife.
My wife Alla (look over our refugee claim) suffered very much from multiple abuses, batteries, insults, and
discrimination in Israel. That all caused already serious damage to her mental and physical health. During first two
years in Canada, she suffered from the consequences of that damage. (A surgery was done to her in relation with
what happened to her in Israel; she often cute her hands, stroke herself not on purpose because of her mental
disorder; once she spent several days in an emergency; by then a danger has threaten her life).
A psychologist found her mental disorders serious enough. He told us that they came in result of her previous life
period, what means in result of our life in Israel. (See her medical reports: Supplements, Documents #13, 14,
15, 16, 17, 18).
Only about a year and a half ago her mental and physical wounds started to heal, and she came almost completely
back to norm. But even now more time is needed and the danger of deportation back to Israel has to be liquidated for
complete improvement of her health.
During our refugee hearings, the IBR members had to see that she was paralyzed by fear and horror so much that
hardly could speak. They could see that she was near an emotional collapse, and they had to understand that it must
be connected with what happened to us in Israel.
By observing us, by listening to my wife's, and my, replies IBR members could easy understand that we belong to a
rare type of people, for whom any suppression of their own pride is unbearable. We could become refugee
claimants and agreed for all the degrading procedures only because of a threat to our lives, only! We care about our
children lives, and we know that they need us. Otherwise, we would never let a person like Mrs. Judith Malka
humiliating over us! It was absolutely clear that something really serious (like a threat to our lives) had to happen to
force people like us to become refugee claimants.
To ignore their observations the IRB members had not to care about our fate at all. Their indifference demonstrated
that they came with prepared in advance negative attitude towards all Russian speaking refugees from Israel in
general. Nothing could change this attitude, no matter who is sitting in front of them... It was visually clear that such a
partial attitude could not be affected by their emotions, by compassion; or they rather had no emotions, no
compassion at all...
Please, read my wife's statement in Group of Documents # 4, Document # 2.
MY MOTHER.
Everything that corresponds to my children and my wife corresponds to my mother as well. If the commissioners had
no mercy towards the children and towards the woman, who suffered so much, then may be they expressed
compassion towards an old mother who might loose her single son (she told them that her younger son died) if we
would be removed to Israel? No, they had no shame before an old mother to use their unfair methods and
demonstrate no sign of a mercy!
ME
I am the very person, whom Israelis persecuted long before then I was taken to Israel (see Document #2). I was
taken to Israel by force, against my will (see Document #2, page 4, paragraphs 2.16., 2.17., and the NOTE).
When I was in Israel, Israeli State radio (RADIO RECA) called me in one of its auditions (3 December 1993, around
noon) "a racist." The radio correspondent Daniela Linor gave an opposite meaning to one of my articles (see
Supplements, Document # 27). In that article ("Israeli (Jewish) Apartheid") I denounced the discriminatory practice
of Israeli authorities against some of the ethnic minorities, including Buchara origins. If not my good relations with
some of the Buchara people and my attempts to help some of them to fight discrimination, I could be in a serious
danger. The community of Buchara is one of the most sensitive and united communities in Israel. This event was
already discussed during my immigration hearings, but the IRB committee did no comments. One newspaper
("Vremja", 5 September 1994, page 18), which published my article "Why Israel is against the Victory Day?", in its
comment called the public to destroy all my works and presented me as traitor and enemy. It was very well known
that this newspaper was by then close to the right opposition led by Mr. Netanyagu, and expressed its opinions (see
the original and its translation in Supplements, Document #28). IRB members did no comments to that, too.
The same newspaper ("Vremja", 1 August 1994, Supplements, Document # 29) placed an interview with me,
distorting my words and trying to discredit me. The interviewer, Mr. Mark Kotlarsky, was my friend, and I trusted him.
But he composed that interview in a humiliating manner, portraying me as a traitor, pathologically tiresome and stupid
person. Pretending to be half serious - half joking he told about me things, which he never discussed with me and
which could turn the whole anger of Israeli ultra-patriots against me. He had no personal reasons for that provocation
and it could be explained only by the involvement of the authorities. (This interview and circumstances, which
surrounded it, were discussed during my immigration hearings). During one of our immigration hearings Mrs.
J. Malka, the immigration officer, used non-conventional methods to distort the reason, why I presented this article,
and did not let me speak. In the same time, she used some information, which I shared with Mr. Mark Kotlarsky only.
In 1993, I was attacked in Tel-Aviv after my conversation with "MAARIV" and "Yidiot Achronot" correspondent,
Avraham Pelet. (See my refugee claim). Mrs. J. Malka's attitude towards this event and her "evaluation" of it was the
same: not to let me speak! Multiple attempts by the governmental structures to confront me with anger of the most
sensitive and dangerous in anger social and ethnic groups could lead to my death and were equal to assassination
attempts. Even here, in Montreal, Israelis threaten me through people, whom I knew in Israel (listen to the tapes of
my last immigration hearing), or via E-mails, or by telephone calls (see Document #30 of Supplements). I also
presented a letter from Israel to the Immigration Board. This letter also informed about such threats (see my file).
These threats are not jokes! To send such a person (who was considered by such a sensitive - towards ideological
opponent - state as Israel as an enemy) backmeans to sign him (me) a death penalty. Know that by sending me back
to Israel you would kill me! I am writing this just to remind you what you might be responsible for.